Replies: 80 Comments
Comment #1: DTW 06 said on 6/14/06 @ 10:45pm ET...
"Kings are the Servants, not the Proprietors of the People"
- Thomas Jefferson
Comment #2: DTW 06 said on 6/14/06 @ 11:18pm ET...
OhioDem1 is at it again. Following is tonight's post from QuestionItNow Voices:
The Man is Here to Challenge Your Vote
During the presidential election of 2004, challenge laws permitted citizens to challenge the right of a voter to vote at the polling place. Challenges were intended to enable others to confirm a voter is a US citizen; actually lives at their registered address; and was in fact, the person whose name appears in the book.
Yet, the challenge was hardly ever used, even though has been on the books since 1951. The Republican plan for Ohio in 2004 was to place attorneys as challengers at voting places with 65% or above Democratic voters. The intent was to intimidate voters, citizen immigrants, and to keep likely Democratic voters away from the polls.
Curiously, Ohio challenge rules changed several times during the week before the election, (no challengers, ok to have challengers, no challengers, ok to challenge, and so on). On Monday, the day before the election, it was ruled that no challengers were allowed. Next, at approximately 2:00 AM on Tuesday morning, just four hours before the 6:30 AM opening of the polls for the presidential election, the rule was changed to permit challengers.
By this time, the Democrats were mobilized to have counter challengers at the same targeted precincts, and it turned out that little or no challenges took place. This is another blatant example of how Blackwell’s abuse of his rule making authority was used to confuse and intimidate voters.
I actually wanted them to challenge me. I had my hospital birth certificate with my tiny baby feet footprints in ink, my passport, my boot camp portrait, a photo of me in Viet Nam, and my Driver's License, a phone bill at my address, the whole shooting match. I was planning on announcing the challenge very loudly so that everyone in the voting room could hear me.
Too bad they did not challenge me; I would have liked doing that. It was wishful thinking. There are far too many Republicans in my precinct for them to have challengers there.
QuestionItNow Blogs
Comment #3: Truth_in_action said on 6/14/06 @ 11:24pm ET...
Congressman JC, I think what I hate most about our political climate in this Administration is that it is THUG POLITICS.
Signing statements are thug politics. It's ramrod ramshackle steamroll right over you politics.
Here is another example. Running on momentum of the last two days of Karl Rove's news, rushing Bush for a photo op into Iraq, and now this - ramrodding a vote with heavy handed threats to "dare" the Democrats to vote against it.
This is not representing ME! This is not what I voted my political representatives to do. This is opportunistic, self-centered, thuggery at its very worst. It's political manipulation so they can have a "talking point" for the feeble-minded. And as Kory and I believe, when they have their October Surprise and they can all say it is because of the rammifications of having gotten rid of the number 2 guy rescently, al-whathisname, who they helped beef up for the media, they'll really have manipulated this war to the top of their advantage for 2006 elections.
We have our work cut out for us, we surely do.
GOP Measure Forces House Debate on War
GOP, House Dems protest GOP blocking of Iraq debate by tying hands
Maybe one good thing coming out of all this THUG POLITICS is that some bipartisan relationships are being created.
Comment #4: Nolip said on 6/14/06 @ 11:33pm ET...
Mathematics and the Dems...doing the math (if they're smart they'll start putting these ads together right now)...
1)2000 Bush steals election, comes to power and high level intelligence gathering tells him of terrorist threats towards US. Bush does nothing during fourteen months of vacation leading up to...
2)2001 terrorist attack on US due to Bush's inaction. 3K plus die in the conflagration. The perpetrator Osama Bin Laden is listed as "Wanted Dead or Alive". 2006, OBL still very much alive.
3)2003 Bush convinces a hurting nation to follow him into Iraq because there's WMDs and nuclear yellow cake pointed at America. Kangaroo Congress writes Bush a blank check. To date close to 2500 US military personnel dead, countless thousands of innocent Iraqis dead or wounded because there were no WMDs or nuclear yellow cake, just some political doublespeak about bringing democracy to Iraq (does anybody here remember the Iraqis asking us to bring democracy to their country?).
4)Two bit terrorist Zarqawi, assumes a leadership role at Terrorist University (the best terrorist camp money can buy as America ponied up 1 trillion dollars to create this learning center for state of the art terror). Zarqawi through his own stupidity is found and blown away.
5) Bush hails Iraq's freedom complete with all the elements in place during Hussein's regime...prisoner abuse, rape, murder and women and children dying by the truckload...only this time the blood is on Bush's hands and it's OK because its for "democracy".
6)2004 Bush turns his sights on Iran because they're trying to become a nuclear power. Bush wants the nuclear option left open so he can nuke Iran until it glows in the dark.
7)Gas prices double in five years of Bush's administration with oil companies making obscene profits and the environment, including the ozone endure serious damage.
8)America faces a new depression as globalization under Bush increases while jobs for Americans go offshore and tax breaks for the wealthy create a false economy of America on loan to foreign governments who underwrite the financial waste of this administration, including but not limited to $9 billion disappearing in Iraq, overpayments to Halliburton and billions more lost to mismanagement at FEMA.
Show America the body bags...show America the torture chambers...show America the raw footage of the torture and tell America that they OK'd this wonderfulness through their elected officials and then ask them if they still want more of the same under Bush?
Basic math...subtract the criminal perpetrator from power and add peace into the mix and America will be amazed at how quickly terrorists will go away. Keep Bush and the hatred that already exists worldwide for American and Americans will grow exponentially and are we really ready to deal with that?
Comment #5: Nolip said on 6/14/06 @ 11:35pm ET...
#4 continued:
""As a result of our efforts during this debate, Americans will recognize that on the issue of national security, they have a clear choice between a Republican Party aware of the stakes and dedicated to victory, versus a Democratic Party without a coherent national security policy that sheepishly dismisses the challenges America faces in a post-9/11 world," Boehner wrote."
GOP measure forces House debate on war
Comment #6: DTW 06 said on 6/15/06 @ 12:14am ET...
#4 - Nolip, Great case, please add spaces between your points. They will be easier for us middle-aged people to read:)Don't despair. It is time to act. It is time to kick asses and take names. It it time to fight. It is time to Take America Back.
It is time to read. It is time to read what our Founding Fathers had to say. Bush's signing statements and the concept of a "unitary executive" have George Washington turning in his grave. "The independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint efforts, of common dangers, sufferings, and success."
Fast forward to 2006 -
"joint efforts" is translated into 'the middle class gets squeezed by the rich and the poor.'
"common dangers" = color coded terror threat levels rising just before elections.
joint "suffering" = Tax Cuts for the rich.
"success" = 'leader' has never been successful in any previous job. Lovely resume there W?
Please, America, don't let George Washington down. Bring competent public servants back into American Government. We need to restore oversight and accountability. We need to re-institute an effective balance of powers. Can we afford to do less?
QuestionItNow
Comment #7: Reed31463 said on 6/15/06 @ 12:30am ET...
The most recent series of post on Constant's blog focuses on the attorneys inside the DoJ and their connection with NSA domestic spying. Six months after the New York Times confirmed what most of us suspected, the DoJ has yet to compile a coherent argument justifying the NSA program, or more likely, programs.
One piece of information that stands out is that the world community now considers the US a rogue nation and the EU is sending a memo to both houses of Congress making that apparent.
An additional inference is that it is being advised not to invest capital in the American market: voluntary economic sanctions, if you will.
Wendy J. Keefer Taking Lessons From Adam J. White?
Senator Feingold has picked up the torch and has began to run with it. Today he was certainly in marathon form as he issued three press releases today. One on the amendment to ban flag desecration, another on net neutrality, and the last, and probably most significant was on FISA and NSA domestic wiretaps. Sen Feingold had this to say,
It is time to up the ante, especially since Rove is now "off the hook." The Attorney General is complicit in all this mess. It is time to have the States also consider an
Impeachment Proclamation for Gonzales. Isn't it time that we remind Darrell Issa that
actions speak louder than words?
Comment #8: Patriot said on 6/15/06 @ 2:36am ET...
Internal GOP Memo: Exploit 9/11 Again, Slander Democrats Again, Deceive America Again
Confidential Messaging Memo – Floor Debate on Iraq and the Global War on Terror
To: House Republican Members
From: House Majority Leader John A. Boehner
Date: June 13, 2006
Re: Confidential Messaging Memo – Floor Debate on Iraq and the Global War on Terror
Comment #9: Reed31463 said on 6/15/06 @ 3:42am ET...
FireHoundPond is just so witty. I am glad they devote so much time to solving real issues. I am so proud to call them part of the blogoshere. Nothing like showing your good moral judgement, civility, and decorum.
What a bunch of egocentric, filthy-mouthed, I'm right, your wrong type of group. 'Nuff said.
Comment #10: wallen said on 6/15/06 @ 7:51am ET...
How To Impeach a President - Watch!
Comment #11: wallen said on 6/15/06 @ 8:02am ET...
Keeping Iraq's Oil In the Ground
Did the U.S. invade Iraq to tap its oil reserves or to make sure they stayed under the sand?
By Greg Palast
click here
Comment #12: wallen said on 6/15/06 @ 8:10am ET...
also a good Greg Palast interview on Democracy Now!
Comment #13: Ohiodem1 said on 6/15/06 @ 9:50am ET...
Without passing on the accuracy of the Palast report in Wallen #11, if the point of Iraq is to keep Iraqi reserves in the ground, with US control over production and drilling into a massive proven reserve, then the "need" to drill ANWAR rings hollow.
The ANWAR reserves have not been proven, which requires test drilling.
This leaves the ANWAR drilling issue as a political rallying point for the Republicans. ANWAR stands as a symbol of the complete and utter defeat of the environmental movement, and as such, it is raised several times from several different directions each session of Congress.
It finds its way into dead of night legislation, with no debate, into conference bills, into so-called "energy policy" bills, appropriations bills and who knows what. They always pass the Republican House, then are defeated by a single vote or maybe two in the Senate. Voila! Some Republican Senator, satisfying a log rolling contract, gets to tout the vote "proving" that he/she is a friend of the environment, and all the while keeping the ANWAR question alive as a rallying cry for Republicans, and a point of contention and concentration of efforts for Democrats. All the while other Republican bad government takes place while people are once again mobilizing to protect ANWAR.
Only by a Democratic takeover of Congress through the ballot box will this constant attack on ANWAR stop.
ANWAR, like guns, gays and God is simply a Republican Talking Point, and it serves to be a mobilization device for the Radical Republican base. How many times each session of this Republican Congress has ANWAR been put on the table, and how many times did we have to step to the plate and devote significant resources to once again defeat it?
Can someone with some research time come up with a count?
Comment #14: wallen said on 6/15/06 @ 12:45pm ET...
High Court Backs Police No-Knock Searches
Jun 15, 11:23 AM (ET)
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that police armed with a warrant can barge into homes and seize evidence even if they don't knock, a huge government victory that was decided by President Bush's new justices.
Alito breaks the tie
Comment #15: wallen said on 6/15/06 @ 12:54pm ET...
Newly released emails suggest Army Corps lied about Cheney role in Halliburton contract
06/15/2006 @ 11:42 am
Filed by Avery Walker
New documents obtained by a conservative watchdog group suggest that the US Army Corp of Engineers may have publicly lied regarding the involvement of the Vice President's office in awarding a 2003 multi-billion dollar, no-bid contract to Kellogg Brown and Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton, RAW STORY has learned.
click here
Comment #16: Citizen J said on 6/15/06 @ 1:12pm ET...
Can we depend on the Senate to preserve Net Neutrality?
Ummm, NOPE.
Corporate Interests always win over the people's
"...The House of Representatives already has voted against rules that would forbid high-speed Internet providers such as AT&T and Comcast from charging extra for priority access to their networks.
`I believe we'll have a similar vote on the floor of the Senate onnet neutrality,' '' said Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, chairman of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, according to a Bloomberg News report."
Comment #17: tahoebasha1 said on 6/15/06 @ 1:46pm ET...
Regarding ANWR. I tried several ways to research the answer as to how many times ANWR drilling has come before the Senate -- very difficult.
As I have a great interest in this, as well, I called my Senator Durbin's office in Washington, and spoke to their head guy (D. Weinstein) on the environment. He, himself, had difficulty, because as we know and as he put it, the ANWR drilling has come up under the guise of so many other bills that it's hard to track. I pressed him for a guestimate since 2000. He said he believes it is at least a dozen times and at least five times during this past year. He was equally anguished by this persistence and sneakiness to get the ANWR drilling in, as he spent a little time doing a little rant of his own.
Comment #18: koryannder said on 6/15/06 @ 2:11pm ET...
OD #13 - ANWAR unnecessary and probably wasteful. Over the Mountain into the MacKenzie River Valley, which overlies the very same oil pool as ANWAR, the Chinese and British (with some American input) are already extracting oil. By the time the oil interests get around to desecrating ANWAR, it may be too late to get any oil - all we'll have is another environmental mess like wyoming. What it's all about, actually, is getting a large payroll into Alaska so that Ted Stevens can brag about it.
Now, I have an interesting suggestion. There MUST BE some honest Republicans out there who are privately appalled by what their nominal "Party" is doing to the Country. I watched the CAFTA debates, and noted that a number of Republicans sounded more like Democrats than many of the Democrats did!
IF as many as ten Honest people can be found who are disgusted with the mess the GOP has created of the Country and can be persuaded to CHANGE their registration to Democrat, all of a sudden it's a new ball game! The Rethugs will lose control of the House, and reorganization will have to take place. Then if Cheney and Bush can REALLY be investigated, and censured or removed from office by impeachment and/or resignation, Nancy Pelosi is a MUCH better possibility for President than Denny Hastert. (Who seems to think that a bill has to be a Rethuglican one even to be considered - but one good dictator deserves another!) Is this idea worth pursuing? I think there are a number of people whose representatives might be persuaded - and if we can get these guys on board NOW, we won't have to wait for November and Rove's surprises.
Comment #19: Truth_in_action said on 6/15/06 @ 2:52pm ET...
#18 Kory, your idea to convince Repugs to change party to Dem is interesting. That would take some serious eyeball-to-eyeball in-the-office visits to do some convincing, don't you think? Do we know who some of these fence-sitting Republicans are?
Rawstory has obtained and posted a copy of a 74 page document of election year guidelines which appears to be many "rebuttal" arguments to those opposing the war.
This is a great opportunity for Democratic House and Senate members to work on their debating skills since all the Republican Iraq war talking points are here at hand!
At least, it's my hope that our fine constituants will grab hold of this great opportunity. And as they say, hope springs eternal.
Pentagon talking points on Iraq, war on terror
Comment #20: Reed31463 said on 6/15/06 @ 2:55pm ET...
Great point OD1, but I think the actual count on the number of times this has come up in legislation is moot. I think our efforts are better served by exposing the absurd legal arguments for NSA domestic wiretaps and putting more pressure on the DoJ.
There is the growing rift between the DoJ and the Senate Judiciary Committee in reference to the ongoing lawsuits and the attempts to obscure the facts by creating legislation ex post facto, legalizing what is so obviously a blatant abuse of power and illegal activity.
Senator Specter's letter is attempt to play politics and buy immunity for himself should impeachment hearings arise. On page three he writes,
Sen. Specter wants to deflect a hearing topic from the obvious illegal activity and a lack of oversight, into a hearing discussing reasons to allow the executive this unwarranted privilege, then offer up
S 2453 to justify the illegal activity.
Glenn Greenwald is following the story. It has also been reported
reported here and
here.
Sen Feingold points out the obvious in
his letter yesterday.
The DoJ is vulnerable because they too take an oath to defend the Constitution and they cannot make the claim of "National Security" or "states secrets" when examining the legal advise they are giving. The American Bar Association needs to wake up and start disbarment proceedings on any number of lawyers in the DoJ, such as David Addington, Alberto Gonzales, Yoo, Viet Dinh, Adam White, Wendy Keefer, Peter Keisler, and Bradford Berenson.
In Michigan and New Jersey, there are lawsuits taking place over NSA domestic wiretaps and the
DoJ is illegally interfering with the New Jersey case and a case in Virginia has already been tampered with.
I remember the philosophical question, "How do you eat an elephant?", and of course the answer is, "One piece at a time." We have leverage and the Executive and Congress are obviously not going to be able to restore balance anytime soon. This leaves us only one other recourse: to seek balance through the Judiciary. So let's start shining the light on the DoJ and chipping away at this elephant.
More to follow. Those who wish to study ahead read Cheney and the 1987 Iran-Contra Minority Report. JC, I know, is
well aware of the ties to Iran-Contra. These problems will never go away until the root cause of the problems facing our constitution are solved. Justice must be served to all those complicit in this widening conspiracy to render the Constitution "quaint."
Comment #21: Ohiodem1 said on 6/15/06 @ 4:37pm ET...
Koryannder - I have been advocating for a long time that it is time for moderate Republicans (there are some) to recognize that the Radical Right Republicans have taken over their party, and have gotten on the train, and left the moderate Republicans at the station.
Their party has left them behind, and the Democrats are now much closer to where they stand than the radical elements of their party that is setting policy, setting the legislative agenda and creating a cesspool of corruption and greed.
It is likely that about 10 per cent, or about 5 million Republicans have no political home. It is time we offer them one.
Comment #22: Nolip said on 6/15/06 @ 5:24pm ET...
Elizabeth Drew's article draws out the huge chasm between what the people believe is their government and what Bush actually has put into place.
Bush has hijacked the democratic ideology and is manipulating it to suit his purposes. Isn't that what Hitler did when he came to power, especially the part about his political enemies falling into a "black hole"?
Comment #23: Rusty said on 6/15/06 @ 6:14pm ET...
GOP senators are now "supporting our troops" by calling for amnesty for insurgents killing American soldiers.
GOP Pigs Oink Their Way into Everlasting INFAMY.
If Democratic candidates have a shred of sense, they'll hammer the GOP into oblivion on this. Republicans walked out onto the Senate floor today and spoke out in support of AMNESTY for "terrorist" killers.
Do America and the world a favor, ConyersBlog readers, write a letter-to-the-editor today about this latest GOP betrayal of our troops.
Comment #24: cali said on 6/15/06 @ 7:48pm ET...
PDA DECLARES 'NO CONFIDENCE' IN BUSBY/BILBRAY ELECTION RESULTS!
Website Statement, Email to 60k Members Calls on Officials to Hold Manual Hand Count of All Paper Ballots, Paper Trails due to Illegal, Unsecure Use of Diebold Voting Machines in Important National Contest!
Joining a growing drumbeat of individuals and organizations, including The BRAD BLOG, Tribune Media's Bob Koehler and VelvetRevolution.us, the Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) has just issued a declaration of "No Confidence" in the reported results of the Busby/Bilbray special U.S. House of Representative run-off election last week in California's 50th congressional district!.
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=2966
Comment #25: Rusty said on 6/15/06 @ 8:53pm ET...
Will wonders never cease? Senate Democrats actually recognized a winning campaign issue WHEN IT DROPPED IN THEIR LAPS, ACCOMPANIED BY THE SCREECH OF SIRENS AND A BIG SIGN SAYING "GOP COMMITS POLITICAL SUICIDE."
(From AmericaBlog)
"DEMOCRATS FIGHT TO STOP AMNESTY FOR IRAQI TERRORISTS
Offer Senate resolution demanding reversal and retraction of reported Iraqi proposal
Washington, DC— Democrats today demanded an immediate retraction and reversal of the reported proposal that terrorists and insurgents who kill American soldiers in Iraq may be granted amnesty by the new Iraqi government.
“It is shocking that the Iraqi Prime Minister is reportedly considering granting amnesty to insurgents who have killed U.S. troops,” said Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid. “On the day we lost the 2,500th soldier in Iraq, the mere idea that this proposal may go forward is an insult to the brave men and women who have died in the name of Iraqi freedom. I call on President Bush to denounce this proposal immediately.”
Democrats offered a Resolution demanding that this policy be repudiated, and that President Bush immediately inform the government of Iraq—in the strongest possible terms—that the United States opposes granting amnesty to anyone who attacks American soldiers. The text of the Sense of the Senate resolution is attached below.
“We ask you Prime Minister Maliki, are you willing to have ‘reconciliation’ on the pool of American blood that has been spilled to give your people and your country a chance for freedom?” said Senator Menendez, a sponsor of the resolution. “We reject that notion and are outraged that the sacrifice of American troops and the American people could be so devalued.”
“Terrorists and insurgents shouldn’t be rewarded for killing American soldiers,” said Senator Bill Nelson, of Florida, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee who also sponsored the resolution.
Democrats Finally Graduate from Political Kindergarten. Send them a card to commemorate this grand accomplishment.
Hell has officially frozen over. Put on your parkas and mittens and meet me at the graduation ceremony.
Comment #26: unspun said on 6/15/06 @ 9:33pm ET...
Mr. Conyers,
I'm currently watching you live on C-span. (Re: Iraq) Thank You! It is so good to hear the Democrats speak out so passionately against the misadministration of the Iraq war and the lack of responsible oversight by the republicans in congress. So far I have also seen Reps. Brown (FL), Dingell (MI), and Rangel (NY). I applaud all of you. (I'm probably missing some Dems as I must turn the channel when the Spinning Republicans share their fairytales and fearmongering--my BP can't handle them anymore).
It's good to see that Rep. Dingell's quote of Theodore Roosevelt--"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president... is morally treasonable to the American public." will be entered into the congressional record.
Though the Democrats are the minority party, they can still represent the people by speaking the truth to power, because it's the right thing to do.
Comment #27: Alma said on 6/15/06 @ 10:50pm ET...
#25 Rusty,
WOW! Wonder if they got the idea from your kos post?
Comment #28: DTW 06 said on 6/15/06 @ 11:19pm ET...
I read a very interesting note on meetings between Iran, China, and Russia at misneach blog this evening. I wonder why I haven’t seen this on Fox News? The strategic value of developing closer relationships is clear to see. For anyone who is paying attention.
China's rapid growth is fueling an insatiable appetite for Oil.
Russia is looking for any market to sell its products and services. Is Iran hiring? Have they posted any want ads for a nuclear scientist?
Today, America is over extended militarily and out of touch diplomatically. I am most saddened by the reckless disregard for diplomacy, civility, and sportsmanship the Bush Administration has displayed since 9/11/01. They have managed to pull defeat and division from the jaws of victory and cohesion.
The world mourned with us and for themselves after Sept. 11th. The attack on the World Trade Center was not only an attack upon America. It was an attack against all humanity. Citizens of far too many other countries died on 9/11 in NYC.
The other countries and thousands of families who lost loved ones at "ground zero" are fighting their own personal wars on terror everyday. Their lives have been changed forever. How dare we allow our "public servants" to exploit their sufferings to launch a preemptive war on Iraq, while not bringing Bin Laden to justice?
QuestionItNow
Comment #29: Rusty said on 6/15/06 @ 11:46pm ET...
Hi Alma,
Yup, they must have seen my Kos diary. Sorry, I've gotta go, I'm in a conference call right now with the DNC, DSCC, DCCC, DLC, and the Draft Mondale in 2008 Political Action Committee.
Comment #30: Nolip said on 6/15/06 @ 11:47pm ET...
The rhetoric of bombast begs the question: "How many of these so called patriotic Republicans have children serving in the military?"
The answer...zero, zip, nada and yet they have no qualms about putting other families childrens' lives on the line in order for them to pursue their personal political agendas under the guise of bringing democracy to Iraq. There's a lot of horse manure on the floor of Congress because the BS coming from the Republican side of the aisle is constant. What cowards! They have no problem sending other folks children to their deaths under the direction of fearless leader Bush ("he feels their pain"...yeh, right) but none of the Bush family has signed up for this war that is the so called path to eradicating terrorism in the world. What are they smoking in Congress? If the Dems were smart they'd show just how committed the Republicans were to the war in Iraq by exposing how many members of Congress on the Republican side of the aisle have children in the military serving in Iraq.
"But as the death toll and price tag of the conflict continue to rise, opinion polls show voters increasingly frustrated with the war and favoring Democrats to control Congress instead of the Republicans who now run the show.
Sensitive to those political realities, Republicans in both the Senate and House sought to put lawmakers of both parties on record on an issue certain to be central in this fall's congressional elections."
Lawmakers trade harsh words over Iraq
Comment #31: wayne said on 6/16/06 @ 3:04am ET...
JC and friends,
I want to ask you does if something makes sense, because frankly it doesn't to me.
Does it make sense that if you planed to attack the United States and were good enough to get the job done that you would risk getting stopped before you were able to complete your mission?
Jesse over at his site tvnewslies.org makes a pretty good point about Boston being 190 miles from the intended target of the WTC and how three airports are within 15 miles. He points out that the master minds would have to expect normal operating procedure not to fail and their intended projectiles would be intercepted by our air defense system if in the air too long. Our air defense is the most sophisticated in the world.
It’s one of those ever glowing red hot smoking guns that point somewhere else and to some other group executing the 9-11 attacks. Now what group could ensure the failure of the US air defense system? If I was a betting man, and I am I would put my money on Norman Minetta testimony regarding the Dicks stand down order available in the 9-11 omission report. Too many questions with obvious answers…
Something I didn’t know until the other day, those two “independent” reports from FEMA and NIST, have the same four people working on both teams; didn’t sound independent to me.
Comment #32: Chemung said on 6/16/06 @ 3:06am ET...
If we were assuming that the current "government" of Iraq were legitimate (and not just a US installed puppet government, like the Shah), then why would it not be reasonable to grant amnesty to Iraqi's who killed members of the invading and occupying US military? Please explain this seemingly stupid position, because I would really like to know how it can be rationally argued.
Are American soldiers somehow "Gods" just because they are American (notwithstanding the atrocities that they have committed against Iraqis)????
How would we judge American Citizens who killed members of an invading and occupying military from another nation?
I think that Democrats are being really stupid and ridiculous on this issue. If "truth and reconciliation" is to ever come about in Iraq, it must include a recognition of the horribly brutal, racist, and genocidal mission that the Bush/Cheney war criminals set our innocent young men and women upon, predictably turning them into paranoid and insane killing machines.
Did these innocent Americans deserve to be killed? Of course not . . . no more than did a chicken in a cockfight that was engineered by sadistic opportunists. It is their lying, and grandiose "commander in chief" who unnecessarily set this hell in motion through his own stupid and naive political ambition and macho hubris who deserves to be punished.
I wish that more people were paying attention to the four point exit strategy that Zbignew Brzynski is advocating. No one is listening to intelligence these days.
During his paternalistic surprise appearance in Iraq, Bush said that the insurgents "are willing to kill innocent people in order to achieve a political objective".
EXCUSE ME!!!!! How many thousands and thousands of innocent people have been killed and maimed by the political objectives of the Bush/Blair elective war? Who can forget the images of shock and awe, mission accomplished, bring-em-on, smoke-em-out, Abu Gharib, beheadings, slaughters, massacres, all so that a tough talking New England blue blood who fancies himself as a texas cowboy can continue to indulge his limitless ego?
Comment #33: MAX 1 said on 6/16/06 @ 3:24am ET...
Call it what you want, but the President's signing statement to the McCain Amendment: President's Statement on Signing of H.R. 2863, the "Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006" http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051230-8.html
Specifically paragraph 8:
The executive branch shall construe Title X in Division A of the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power, which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President, evidenced in Title X, of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks. Further, in light of the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2001 in Alexander v. Sandoval, and noting that the text and structure of Title X do not create a private right of action to enforce Title X, the executive branch shall construe Title X not to create a private right of action. Finally, given the decision of the Congress reflected in subsections 1005(e) and 1005(h) that the amendments made to section 2241 of title 28, United States Code, shall apply to past, present, and future actions, including applications for writs of habeas corpus, described in that section, and noting that section 1005 does not confer any constitutional right upon an alien detained abroad as an enemy combatant, the executive branch shall construe section 1005 to preclude the Federal courts from exercising subject matter jurisdiction over any existing or future action, including applications for writs of habeas corpus, described in section 1005.
essentially absolves him from this Amendment all together, and at his choosing. And in doing so, his actions shall be construed as past, present and future and that no Federal court shall have jurisdiction on present and future actions of the President.
Comment #34: Chemung said on 6/16/06 @ 3:25am ET...
It is stupid rhetoric like this (below), reposted by RUSTY, that makes me think that the Democrats have no chance of speaking with any credible comprehension or authority on the issue of the Iraq war. This is the kind of stupid rhetoric that confirms the view of Democrats as a reactionary opposition with no credible agenda of its own. Just thoughtlessly screaming in opposition to everything is no credible strategy.
In this case, Reid and others are wrong wrong wrong:
"(From AmericaBlog)
"DEMOCRATS FIGHT TO STOP AMNESTY FOR IRAQI TERRORISTS
Offer Senate resolution demanding reversal and retraction of reported Iraqi proposal
Washington, DC— Democrats today demanded an immediate retraction and reversal of the reported proposal that terrorists and insurgents who kill American soldiers in Iraq may be granted amnesty by the new Iraqi government.
“It is shocking that the Iraqi Prime Minister is reportedly considering granting amnesty to insurgents who have killed U.S. troops,” said Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid. “On the day we lost the 2,500th soldier in Iraq, the mere idea that this proposal may go forward is an insult to the brave men and women who have died in the name of Iraqi freedom. I call on President Bush to denounce this proposal immediately.”
Democrats offered a Resolution demanding that this policy be repudiated, and that President Bush immediately inform the government of Iraq—in the strongest possible terms—that the United States opposes granting amnesty to anyone who attacks American soldiers. The text of the Sense of the Senate resolution is attached below.
“We ask you Prime Minister Maliki, are you willing to have ‘reconciliation’ on the pool of American blood that has been spilled to give your people and your country a chance for freedom?” said Senator Menendez, a sponsor of the resolution. “We reject that notion and are outraged that the sacrifice of American troops and the American people could be so devalued.”
“Terrorists and insurgents shouldn’t be rewarded for killing American soldiers,” said Senator Bill Nelson, of Florida, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee who also sponsored the resolution."
Shame on Democrats for taking such a stupid position. Can anyone relate to the abject hell that the Iraqi people have experienced under the "coalition" invasion and occupation?
Comment #35: Chemung said on 6/16/06 @ 3:27am ET...
If we were assuming that the current "government" of Iraq were legitimate (and not just a US installed puppet government, like the Shah), then why would it not be reasonable to grant amnesty to Iraqi's who killed members of the invading and occupying US military? Please explain this seemingly stupid position, because I would really like to know how it can be rationally argued.
Are American soldiers somehow "Gods" just because they are American (notwithstanding the atrocities that they have committed against Iraqis)????
How would we judge American Citizens who killed members of an invading and occupying military from another nation?
I think that Democrats are being really stupid and ridiculous on this issue. If "truth and reconciliation" is to ever come about in Iraq, it must include a recognition of the horribly brutal, racist, and genocidal mission that the Bush/Cheney war criminals set our innocent young men and women upon, predictably turning them into paranoid and insane killing machines.
Did these innocent Americans deserve to be killed? Of course not . . . no more than did a chicken in a cockfight that was engineered by sadistic opportunists. It is their lying, and grandiose "commander in chief" who unnecessarily set this hell in motion through his own stupid and naive political ambition and macho hubris who deserves to be punished.
I wish that more people were paying attention to the four point exit strategy that Zbignew Brzynski is advocating. No one is listening to intelligence these days.
During his paternalistic surprise appearance in Iraq, Bush said that the insurgents "are willing to kill innocent people in order to achieve a political objective".
EXCUSE ME!!!!! How many thousands and thousands of innocent people have been killed and maimed by the political objectives of the Bush/Blair elective war? Who can forget the images of shock and awe, mission accomplished, bring-em-on, smoke-em-out, Abu Gharib, beheadings, slaughters, massacres, all so that a tough talking New England blue blood who fancies himself as a texas cowboy can continue to indulge his limitless ego?
Comment #36: Rusty said on 6/16/06 @ 4:30am ET...
Hey CHEMUNG,
Get a grip.
If you would quit hyperventilating, perhaps you would realize that supporting amnesty for people who ARE STILL KILLING OUR SOLDIERS is not something AMERICAN VOTERS ARE LIKELY TO BE IN FAVOR OF.
Let me repeat that for you: SUPPORTING AMNESTY FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE STILL KILLING OUR SOLDIERS IS NOT SOMETHING AMERICAN VOTERS ARE LIKELY TO BE IN FAVOR OF.
Do you want the RePugs to be in power FOREVER? They WILL BE if Democrats don't win this midterm election political battle for the support of American voters.
Democrats are not going to retake Congress from these GOP criminals by sitting around the fucking camp fire with you singing Kumbayah.
Democrats have tried to take the high road time after time, and the GOP keeps ripping them to shreds in election after election.
This issue is something the Democrats can rip the Republicans to shreds with, and win the votes necessary to take Congress back. Then, and ONLY THEN, will they be able to govern and enact the policies we all support here.
I'm not against the principle of amnesty for the Iraqis who are fighting against an occupying army.
That would be worth pursuing AFTER we get our young men and women out of that hellhole.
In case you haven't noticed, our young men and women are NEVER going to be out of Iraq as long as the RePugs control Congress. So instead of preaching to Democrats about taking the moral high aground AGAIN, so they'll be up there ALL ALONE AGAIN, how about helping us win this damn midterm election so we can STOP the killing of all the innocent victims over there, Iraqis AND Americans.
Comment #37: wallen said on 6/16/06 @ 5:51am ET...
Just a number?
QUESTION: Tony, American deaths in Iraq have reached 2,500. Is there any response or reaction from the president on that?
SNOW: You know, it's a number, and every time there's one of these 500-benchmarks, people want something.
Comment #38: DTW 06 said on 6/16/06 @ 9:08am ET...
#37 - Wallen
Do you think it is time to send the Bush mouthpiece to sensitivity training? "one of these 500-benchmarks"? Perhaps Tony Snow would feel a bit different if 500 human bodies were piled up in his office. Or if he lost friends or family in Iraq. Where is the support for the troops in this cold language?
Comment #39: feline said on 6/16/06 @ 10:43am ET...
Attention, Admin: I'm getting an error page when I attempt to post a comment on JC's most recent thread. Thank you!
On topic for this thread, to locate and read specific signing statements, GPO Access has search page.
#11, 12 Wallen, I agree that Greg Palast and Democracy Now! are excellent resources for information.
#13, OhioDem, not sure if this has any implications for ANWAR, but I did a search, and came up with this from August of 2002, Bering Strait Dream Won't Die
#28 DTW06, I'm going to check out your link to discussion, it may have some implications to the Bering Strait theory I'm postulating.
Also, DTW and OhioDem, thank you for sharing your website links here, your experiences.
My apologies for delayed and sporadic responses here, it's difficult to keep up!
Comment #40: feline said on 6/16/06 @ 11:02am ET...
On topic for your most recent thread, JC, I hope that the Democrats can bring some points to the Iraq debate that shed light on the Republicans' attempt to confuse the issues. Of course the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the so-called "war on terror" are two distince issues, despite the attempt by Republicans to defend their illegal actions by falsely stating we are at "at war".
#19 Truth In Action, #30 Nolip, the Republicans' hypocricy is astounding.
I also hope that Democrats continue to speak out on the issue of net neutrality, thank you JC for being our advocate on this issue. #16 Citizen J, yes, the Republicans put corporate interests over citizens' interests continuously. I believe it is the foundation of current abusive domestic and foreign policies. Why is the Constitution interpreted to protect corporate interests as if a corporate body is a person? I believe this is an issue that must be addressed by Congress in the future in order to restore our Democracy.
Comment #41: feline said on 6/16/06 @ 11:45am ET...
Ohiodem1 and DTW06, I tried commenting on QuestionItNow, but I had trouble registering a user name to blog. If you would like to explore some theories, I'd be happy to do it here, or maybe you can give me some tips on how to register there. Thank you!
Comment #42: koryannder said on 6/16/06 @ 12:03pm ET...
What is plain is that Rove has every intention of using lies, innuendo, wedge issues, disenfranchisement and crooked machines to "Win" in 2006 and beyond. A question should be asked on the floor of Congress REPEATEDLY; "What are the Republicans afraid of, that they refuse to run an honest campaign on the issues and refrain from lies and wedges? WHY are the Republicans not lining up to co-sponsor Holt's Bill to insure HONEST voting machines? Are they afraid that HONEST Elections will insure their defeat??" (Of course the question is rhetorical - the obvious answer is "Yes," but no Rethuglican will give it - so the question must be asked, over and over again.)
Comment #43: Nolip said on 6/16/06 @ 2:12pm ET...
The Democrats don't have their stuff together when stuff like this occurs...there should be a united front to the affront of Bush's illegal war but there is none? A legitimate question to ask the Republicans: "So tell me when you or one of your children served in the armed forces in Iraq"?
"Democrats denounced the debate and vote as a politically motivated charade, and most, including Pelosi, voted against the measure. They said that supporting it would have the effect of affirming Bush's "failed policy" in Iraq.
Balking carried a risk for Democrats, particularly when they see an opportunity to win back control of Congress from the GOP. Republicans likely will use Democratic "no" votes to claim that their opponents don't support U.S. troops.
In fact, 42 Democrats broke ranks and joined with all but three Republicans to support the resolution. Two Republicans and three Democrats declined to take a position by voting present."
House rejects timetable for Iraq pullout
Comment #44: DTW 06 said on 6/16/06 @ 3:39pm ET...
#41 - Feline - No need to register for QuestionItNow. You don't need a blogger account, there are three different options for commenting.
However, sometimes the word verification gives me trouble. The q's & g's look very similair. Feel free to send an email to Comments@QuestionItNow.com I will be glad to help you out.
Comment #45: tahoebasha1 said on 6/16/06 @ 4:05pm ET...
Off Topic?
From PFAW
"As you may know, Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell is at it again, abusing his power by disenfranchising already underrepresented communities in the coming elections. Election Protection 365 is not taking it sitting down.
Secretary of State Blackwell effectively shut down all voter registration efforts in Ohio when he enacted regulations a week and a half ago that severely restrict the operations of groups seeking to register traditionally disenfranchised voters. Under these new regulations, compensated voter registration workers must turn in the forms they collect directly to elections officials, and not to the group sponsoring the voter registration drive. This means that voter registration groups can’t keep good records – and that means they can’t do the necessary follow up to make sure the voters actually make it onto the voting rolls (and we all know we’ve seen problems with that in the past!).
As if that weren’t enough, these new rules also threaten criminal penalties for individuals registering voters if they do not exactly conform to complicated, burdensome procedures. The threat of criminal prosecution will have such a chilling effect that no one will want to risk engaging in voter registration efforts that expand democracy and empower their communities, and poor people, young people and African Americans will be shut out of our democracy.
On June 26, the Ohio Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review (JCARR) will have the opportunity to reject the Secretary of State’s new policy and they need to hear from you! Even if you don’t live in Ohio, your voice matters – this type of blatant voter suppression in any state sets a dangerous precedent that all Americans have an obligation to speak out against.
People For the American Way Foundation is launching an online petition against Blackwell’s unjust regulations. Sign it today and an e-mail will go directly to JCARR members registering your opposition to this blatant voter suppression.
Petition
We’ve already had one victory in this battle. Due to backlash from civil rights organizations, the media and everyday citizens, Blackwell announced Thursday that he would rescind one part of the rule that had required certain registrations to be hand-delivered, and not mailed. While this is a step in the right direction, too many unnecessary burdens remain.
Shutting people out of the democratic process is not the American Way. Weigh in against this right-wing attack on voting rights by signing our petition today!"
After you sign the petition, please forward this e-mail to your friends and ask them to show their support for voting rights by signing as well.
Comment #46: Ohiodem1 said on 6/16/06 @ 5:35pm ET...
Admin - bad link in the thread above, cannot access comments link.
Comment #47: Ohiodem1 said on 6/16/06 @ 6:04pm ET...
Feline #40 - Confusing the issue is what Republicans do best. When a Republican, usually in the form of Bill Frist setting a date for a debate on this or that emotional and/or devisive (or both), that is a means to divert attention from one thing or another that they do not want people to notice.
Bill Frist sets a debate on Immigration. Tom DeLay sneaks out the back door with very little publicity. DeLay should have been expelled from the House with great fanfare, but he gets to leave on his terms, at a date that maximizes Republican political benefit in Texas, and with relatively little notice from our agressively truth-seeking press.
A discussion around is the line-item veto, and it is always sold as a way for the President to stuff pork barrel politics. If this unconstitutional delegation of the legislative branch's power to be the only branch capable of legislating, then nothing would be there to stop the president from killing social programs, or from ripping the social safety net. How about killing off some element of environmental appropriations, say for the enforcement division of the EPA? Or de-funding MSHA or OSHA to hurt safety efforts in the workplace? You get the picture. This power could be used to continue and even make pork barrel politics even worse. How about not line iteming a bridge to nowhere, and killing a highway in a blue state, all by lining out the funding?
Three other items.
1. Al Zarqari killed.
2. President flies to Baghdad.
3. President declares a 140,000 square mile National Monument in Hawaiian waters.
1. Republican spin (not the president's) is that we are winning the War on Terror. Right wing press uses this to present the argument that the war effort is going well, and provide an opportunity to spin what I call the "illusion of victory".
2. President flies into Baghdad with no notice in the dead of night, and no notice or consultation with the head of state. According to right wing press, president risks his life flying to the green zone wearing 25 pounds of body armor. At the same time, making an argument that the illusion of victory is real. By the way, how come the president gets 25 pounds of body armor when the soldiers he commands cannot get it?
3. Don't get me wrong, establishing a 140,000 square mile ocean preserve is a good thing, even a very good thing. It is most likely the single most positive thing the president has ever done for the environment. This also unequivocally proves that there is no oil under Hawaii. Can you imagine the president placing a nature preserve in a location anywhere in the world where oil exists or even may exist. Remember this man's continous attack on ANWAR.
Every time the Republicans bring one of these big issues up for debate, they are hiding something else they are doing. Immigration, sweep spying on Americans without warrants under the rug. Gay marriage and/or flag burning amendments, sneak an attack on ANWAR or the elimination of net neutrality over the transom.
When I attended public administration school, one of my favorite professors (a Republican, by the way) said, whenever a politician gives you something with his right hand, put your hand over your wallet and never take your eye off what he is doint with his left hand. He is doing something sneaky.
This post is too long, thanks for letting me rant.
Comment #48: Ohiodem1 said on 6/16/06 @ 6:07pm ET...
Tahoe, J. Kenneth Blackwell is always on the cutting edge of voter suppression, underhanded rulemaking, even when he has no authority to make a rule, he will do it anyway to see if he can get away with it. Funny, he never tries to supress voters likely to vote Republican.
Comment #49: tahoebasha1 said on 6/16/06 @ 8:51pm ET...
#48 - OD1
I find it really mind-boggling how Blackwell can continually attempt and get away with undermining and even controlling the rights of voters. Is there no built-in legislation in Ohio, so as to prevent this kind of perversion of the voting laws? Or has a law, if it exists, simply gone unchallenged? I also wonder at Ohioans(sp?) and their seeming complacency. Where is their outrage?
". . . .he will do it anyway to see if he can get away with it." He sounds like the Bush of Ohio. But worse (or equal) than that, he seems to be an utter "whore."
It's crucial for all of us that we guard and keep an eye on Ohio very, very carefully, which, I am sure, goes without saying. We need to, each and every one of us, fight against Blackwell in every way that we can, hence, my post above.
And to think, this man aspires to be governor of Ohio! Ad nauseum!
Comment #50: Ohiodem1 said on 6/16/06 @ 10:48pm ET...
Tahoe, I was watching a local public affairs program this evening, and the two liberals on the panel let the two righties get away with calling this an "error" on the part of SecState staffers, interpreting the provisions of HB3 and another Ohio elections law passed by the Republican legislature and signed by the Republican governor last year. That was the infamous law that permits all PAC's but Labor PAC's to contribute $10,000 to a state candidate's campaign, but it limits the labor union PAC to $2500. If, as the Supreme Court is on record as saying that money is political speech, then your boss has $4 of political speech than you do through your labor organization. I cannot, for the life of me, understand why Ohio candidates supported by labor or the labor organizations have not litigated this as a clear vioation of the unequal protection of the laws clause of the Constitution. This is in there in clear language that even an origionalist justice can understand.
Why does your boss have four times as much political speech as you do?
OD1
Comment #51: Ohiodem1 said on 6/16/06 @ 10:54pm ET...
To follow up on a point made just above. As we all know, if you are in charge, the buck stops here. You take responsibility for what the people in your charge do.
Not Ken Blackwell. No, he blames his staff as being overzealous in implementing the letter of the massive law, then he will retrench a bit. This excessive rule making is what Mr. Blackwell did in 2004, and he is doing it again, even though everyone knows that he will do this again and again. Then he blames his staff. It seems a little strange to me, that J. Kenneth Blackwell a very skillful lawyer, would allow rule makng in his department of state without knowing exactly what the rule is, and what the effect of that rule will be. If you were running the Secretary of State office in your state, would you read a major interpretation of the law you are charged with enforcing? Would you?
Comment #52: DTW 06 said on 6/16/06 @ 10:59pm ET...
#47 - OhioDem1 - It looks like you are preparing How to Sell a War Part II - 21st Century Power Grabs
Comment #53: tahoebasha1 said on 6/16/06 @ 11:40pm ET...
#50 - OD1
Well, I guess I understand those implications well enough -- MONEY!
#51-OD1
So, from what I gather, Blackwell implements "his" laws, and then, turns around and accuses his own staff of overzealousness, as though he had had no part in the creation of "his" law(s).
A normal official, it would seem to me, lest I be naive, would, of course, read the interpretation of the law to which he/she sought to enforce. Sumting wong, here!
Such an upstanding human being, n'est que pas?
But, operationally, I see such a likeness to Bush -- he must be buddies with Bush and Rove! He is quite dangerous considering his modis operandi.
Comment #54: Nolip said on 6/17/06 @ 6:34am ET...
Rove is back in the news and not because he's about to be frog marched out of the white house...
The military take out an enemy, such as Zarqawi, in a manner called "eliminating with extreme prejudice"...politically speaking the Dems need to find a way to do the same to Rove and in so doing...Bush.
Fall elections are Rove's next test
Rove’s Trap
The president's strategist is politicizing the Iraq war for partisan political gain. Will the Dems figure out how to fight back?
On an up note (which makes you wonder if the two journalist cited above aren't working for team Bush)...
Poll: Bush's unpopularity could hurt GOP candidates
Comment #55: Nolip said on 6/17/06 @ 6:41am ET...
"Rep. Walter Jones, the North Carolina Republican who invented the phrase "Freedom Fries," invited me into his Capitol Hill office Thursday morning, a cluttered space festooned from floor to ceiling with military memorabilia, Pentagon plaques and photographs of soldiers. Then he pulled out an e-mail he had recently received from an Army captain who served in Iraq.
The email quoted another American soldier serving in Iraq, a voice that Jones wanted people to hear. "Tell all those assholes in D.C. to get us the f--- out of here. This is bullshit," Jones said, reading from the email, but choosing not to pronounce the f-word in full. "Either that or tell them to tell Bush to send over the twins. They can bunk with me. That would be useful."
Jones is not a natural dove. He sits on the Armed Services committee and his district includes Camp Lejeune, the home base of nearly 47,000 sailors and marines. But Jones is one of a handful of Republican congressmen to break ranks with President Bush and the GOP leadership over Iraq. In recent months, he has been campaigning for a "full and honest" debate on the Iraq war. "
Resolved: America great! Bin Laden evil! Go Bush!
Not even the inventor of "freedom fries" could stand to be present at the GOP-controlled Congress' absurd "debate" over Iraq.
Comment #56: koryannder said on 6/17/06 @ 8:04am ET...
I am baffled. Some of the activities of Ken Blackwell are felonies, IF it can be proven that they are HIS activities. People have been frogmarched into durance vile by federal marshals, denied attorneys or even allowed to contact their families, for lesser activities - or, for that matter, for no provable activities at all. WHY IS THIS MAN STILL FREE? Oh - I forgot, he's a Republican official, and hence lily-white and innocent of any wrongdoing. I wonder - of course he's going to do all he can to disenfranchise democrats and jigger the voting machines - but suppose by some accident some honesty creeps in and the voters of Ohio are allowed to elect a Democratic Legislature. Do you think it would be possible to impeach this pissant on the basis of the crimes he committed while Secretary of State?
Comment #57: Reed31463 said on 6/17/06 @ 1:49pm ET...
#39 feline,
Consider adding the GPO link to resources.
I can see only one small problem with the Bering Strait Dream: Plate Tectonics.
#13 OD1,
Your answer to these questions are here.
1. How many times each session of this Republican Congress has ANWAR been put on the table,
2. how many times did we have to step to the plate and devote significant resources to once again defeat it?
Response "It Depends."
- The ratio of articles to committee hearings is about 37: 1
- The Congress has held 10 hearings on the issue since 1991.
- In the 13 years since RNC controlled congress in 1994, it's been brought up 2.6 times each Congressional session. More...
#15 TahoeBasha1 (previous thread),You wrote, "As of Friday afternoon that indictment, returned by the grand jury the week of May 10th, remains under seal - more than a month after it was handed up by the grand jury.
The case number is "06 cr 128." On the federal court's electronic database, "06 cr 128" is listed along with a succinct summary: "No further information is available."
I received
this transmission:
1. Fitzgerald. We judge the Fitzgerald "sealed indictment" is not US V. _???_; but "Grand Jury v. _???_" [Cheney hasn't testified, perhaps they have sealed an indictment against Cheney?]
snip
We judge the Fitzgerald "sealed indictment" is not US V. _???_; but "Grand Jury v. Bush/Cheney"
JC,The following
information may be useful for preparing subpoenas.
Directory4. Judiciary Cmte Subpoena: Save, forward this to Congressman Conyers: Click: Will be useful for subpoena lists, identifying DoD General Counsels [See page 20/104]; and JAG, JAG2]; Addington/VP POCs in DoD, and cross referencing the FOIA and e-mails related to Abu Ghraib, Iraq, and NSA.
I would suggest saving the PDF file before the link disappears.
Comment #58: Reed31463 said on 6/17/06 @ 3:16pm ET...
A Call to Arms!
Operation Constellation is underway. Those wishing to fight this cabal now instead of waiting, join us in SoapBox4Truth.org.
There is much work to do and we need Thomas Paines, Ben Franklins, and James Madisons to write and expose to the public, those responsible for ridiculous legal arguments leading to torture, NSA domestic wiretaps, illegal searches, illegal use of funds, and any number of Constitutional abbrogations.
Stop worrying about the distractions. Let's apply some real heat.
The circle continues to shrink and someone has a pinata swing in them, just waiting to strike and bust this thing wide apart. Who will it be: OD1? Or, how about feline? Tahoebasha, Frosty, and Rusty have all had editorials published: could one of them be the next one to drive a stake? Alma, the quiet one, is a powerful ally. Trust me, you never want to be on her bad side. Relieve your anger frustration and disgust with positive actions.
Now is the time. Think of all the men and women in Iraq that want to come home. Think of all the Iraqi civilians that are being mistreated and used due to poor leadership currently in our military. There will be no tomorrows for some of them. So think about that when you make up your mind to act or not act. Can you look yourself in the mirror and say, "I did the best I could." I hope the answer is, "Yes!"
Let's make a difference. Operation Constellation is underway.
Comment #59: Nolip said on 6/17/06 @ 10:03pm ET...
"Join PDA, The BRAD BLOG, Tribune Media's Bob Koehler, VelvetRevolution.us and thousands of Americans so far, in declaring NO CONFIDENCE in the reported results of the Busby/Bilbray special U.S. House of Representative run-off election last week in California's 50th congressional district!
See how poll workers taking the voting machines home for overnights days before the election rendered them uncertifed and illegal for use by both State and Federal standards, leaving the announced results wholly unverifiable at this time.
Take your democracy back! Declare "No Confidence!" Sign the VR petition… "
Declare 'NO CONFIDENCE' in Reported Busby/Bilbray Election Results!
Comment #60: Reed31463 said on 6/17/06 @ 10:54pm ET...
#59 Nolip,
Wilco, Over!
Done.
Comment #61: Reed31463 said on 6/17/06 @ 11:56pm ET...
DoD and Iran, Iran-Contra Figures Resurface, Again
Current military and former intelligence officials remain concerned about a US-led strike on Iran, despite the recent appearance of diplomacy on the part of the US State Department and the offer of an incentives package to Iran.
Officials point to new developments, such as a recent meeting in Rome between an Iranian arms dealer and controversial neoconservative Michael Ledeen and the March creation of the Iranian directorate inside the Pentagon.
Snip
Ghorbanifar and Ledeen were directly involved in the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980s, which implicated then-President Ronald Reagan, Vice President George H. W. Bush and the highest ranking members of the Reagan administration in the illegal sales of weapons to Iran.
Ledeen’s recent visit to Rome and meeting with Ghorbanifar have created new concern that something is developing with regard to US plans for Iran.
Snip
A recent article by Laura Rozen for the Los Angeles Times revealed the Pentagon has created yet another Office of Special Plans-type body called the Directorate for Iran, or the Iranian Directorate.
“The Pentagon's directorate began with six full-time staff members," Rozen reported. "But they can draw on expertise throughout the government, providing access to potentially hundreds of specialists."
Snip
Venable also confirmed that the new directorate falls under the policy side -- more specifically -- under the new number three at the Pentagon, Eric Edelman. Edelman, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, holds the same position that Douglas Feith held when he ran OSP at the Pentagon in the lead-up to the Iraq war.
Moreover, sources say that the Iranian Directorate is staffed with many of the same people, including OSP’s former director Abram Shulsky, and receives expert analysis from such controversial figures as Project for the New American Century member Reuel Marc Gerecht, who by all accounts was a failure as a CIA field officer. It also includes military personnel such as Ladan Archin, who appears to be serving in the Larry Franklin analyst role among a sea of think-tank operatives and neoconservative war hawks.
These Iran-Contra figures just keep getting recycled over and over. When are Americans going to get wise and eliminate them from public service once and for all? There is only one sure way to do that: impeachment and jail.
DoJ attorneys can be connected to illegal activity using public, non-classified information. For example: data mining
appears to have started as early as 1995. This
email is a request for technical assistance with the programming (Note the server name). Also
this meeting scheduled in February of 1997 discussing
net neutrality. The comments attached should give you an indication of the possibilities forseen by these experts.
The American Bar Association needs to be informed of the specifics. Disbarment can occur for corporate lawyers and DoJ attorneys who have advocated breaching the 4th Amendment in reference to providing the government with access to private records.
The emails, names, and addresses are out there. All we have to do is make it known and start connecting their nasty trail of betrayal for money and kickbacks.
Comment #62: DTW 06 said on 6/18/06 @ 12:27am ET...
Happy Father's Day!
I Wish
My wife was kicking my ass last evening in Scrabble. Her '108' score for one play, was by far the highest score I have ever heard of in Scrabble! Anyhow, since she was already kicking my ass in a nuclear way, I decided to 'waste' one of the blank tiles for a "W" to spell WISH.
I wish you peace.
I wish you love.
I wish you help from above.
I wish you passion.
I wish us compassion.
I wish us freedom.
I wish us wisdom.
I wish us integrity.
R.E.B.
Comment #63: Reed31463 said on 6/18/06 @ 1:30am ET...
TIA, NOT!
This TIA is not to be confused with Truth In Action TIA. This TIA is Totally Invasive and Annoying. It should be Totally Illegal and Acrimonious.
Comment #64: cali said on 6/18/06 @ 3:02am ET...
Mentioned on Ring of Fire tonight.
No more information yet
Bobby, Mike and Matt Schultz, an attorney with Levin Papantonio, discuss their lawsuits against Diebold and the other electronic voting machine companies that helped the Republicans steal Ohio in 2004.
http://www.ringoffireradio.com/default1.asp
Comment #65: Patriot said on 6/18/06 @ 4:21am ET...
A must view on Tuesday night PBS's Frontline:
The Dark Side - Cheney vs CIA a documentary.
"Amid daily revelations about prewar intelligence and a growing scandal surrounding the indictment of the vice president's chief of staff and presidential adviser, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, FRONTLINE goes behind the headlines to investigate the internal war that was waged between the intelligence community and Richard Bruce Cheney, the most powerful vice president in the nation's history," says the press release.
Comment #66: Truth_in_action said on 6/18/06 @ 9:42am ET...
#63, Reed buddy and others, Wayne Madsen has more information about TIA (and that ain't me!). It has appeared to me for some time that data theft has a covert operational feeling. Wayne has some backup for my 2 cent suspicions. Scroll down to the story dated June 17, 2006, first sentence reading "What's behind all the personal data thefts".
Happy Father's day, folks! Please take some time to cherish those in your life who serve that role, or a moment for yourself if you are that person.
Comment #67: Ohiodem1 said on 6/18/06 @ 1:10pm ET...
Reed, maybe they should call this the Pentagon Iran Group, similar to the White House Iraq Group (WHIG). The new group would have the acronym PIG.
Comment #68: koryannder said on 6/18/06 @ 1:52pm ET...
Attention! Has ANYONE been able to post a comment to Thursday's Blog on "Net Neutrality?" I have tried, and got "The page cannot be displayed," several times. Do you suppose JC's Blog has been hacked? and if so, first, it shows that it's having an effect, and second, raises the question, "What took them so long?"
How about it, Admin - is there something evil going on that the PTB don't want us to comment on?
Comment #69: Ohiodem1 said on 6/18/06 @ 3:32pm ET...
Korryander - Several people, including myself have left notes for admin on this point. My guess is that admin took the weekend off, and there is something wrong with the address. You'd think the whole site would be down if it were hacked.
Nothing will prevent us from commenting on net neutrality here, with the proviso, for next thread, no. 477.
For my two cents worth, I am all for Net Neutrality. This comment is for thread 477.
Comment #70: Reed31463 said on 6/18/06 @ 3:47pm ET...
Comment #67: OD1,
Good one OD1, LOL!
So be it, Pentagon Iran Group (PIG) it is! From this day forward, I will refer to this special office as DoD PIG.
Comment#68: koryannder,
"Do not adjust your picture, there is nothing wrong with your set..."
No one can post on the new thread, but more worrisome than some technical glitch with the new thread is the fact that the archives are also missing.
Comment #57, RE: Case number: "06 cr 128", Additional analysis is here.
Comment #71: Ohiodem1 said on 6/18/06 @ 4:49pm ET...
Reed - I just got in to the archives. I clicked on "archives" above, and got right in, and tried a couple of random entries, no problem.
OD1
Comment #72: Alma said on 6/18/06 @ 4:53pm ET...
OD1,
The individual entries in archives are okay, but if you try the ones for a whole month it gives you the "the page cannot be found" message.
Comment #73: Frosted Flake said on 6/18/06 @ 5:28pm ET...
Thank you Reed, for keeping an eye on Sealed v. Sealed.
I have been trying to write about Hudson v. Michigan. Trying to write briefly.
Ha-ha-ha, ho-ho-ho, hee-he-he, giggle - snort - wheeze - hack - gasp, struggle to breathe. Oh, dammit!
Y'know, I'd like to make it short enough that you might read it. At the same time I'd like it to be long enough to contain the points to be made. And I would like to conclude it with a good suggestion toward addressing the problems presented, so as to avoid the appearance of being a, well, um, whiner.
I'd rather be viewed as a potentialy helpful suggestion puter-forward-er, although this seems not to be an English word. This is unfortunate in that the meaning of English words is one of the points that seems to need making in this essay.
If anyone is independantly pursueing a similar line, here is some of the points I have been reviewing. (Can I see yours?)
Analysis: Exclusionary rule in trouble? by L. Denniston, SCOTUSBlog
Transcript, oral argument, Hudson v Michigan
Above transcript obtained here.
Where also might be found this very interesing case
The final referance clarifies that remedy for abuses of Constitutional right must be directed a individuals, not at thier employers, irrespective of whether the employer allowed, by intent or not, the violation, irrespective of whether the employer required the violation, irrespective of indemnification of the employee (covering damages) by the employer, its' insurer, or the employers' employer. This last is relevant in that Hudson v Michigan seems inextricably bound to Garcetti v Cebalos and both seem bound similarly to Correctional Services Corperation v Malesko.
Yeah, I'm working on it, Okay?
Thank you.
Frosted Flake
Comment #74: Reed31463 said on 6/18/06 @ 6:22pm ET...
OD1 & Alma,
Thanks, that is good to know!
Comment #75: Rusty said on 6/18/06 @ 6:59pm ET...
I'll be reading this thread more thoroughly as soon as I catch up on my CodePink mail.
By the way, birthdays are dangerous, avoid them if possible.
Comment #76: tahoebasha1 said on 6/18/06 @ 8:39pm ET...
Well, it seems that Rusty is having a bit of a problem with birthdays -- and don't we all?
*
All of us couldn't be more proud right now. Rusty has had one of his most important posts "Welcome to Death Camp Earth, Owned and Operated by BushCo Incorporated" Holocaust published not once today, but twice -- in a very difficult area to be published. Kudos are not enough for Rusty -- considering his wake-up call to Americans to "see the light." See www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=130418§ion=Opinion and see (The link worked earlier but does not seem to work now.) Grand Forks Herald
Little by little, bit by bit . . . . !
Comment #77: tahoebasha1 said on 6/18/06 @ 10:04pm ET...
"Holocaust" American style, I meant to say!
Comment #78: Alma said on 6/19/06 @ 12:12am ET...
Rusty,
Birthdays are only dangerous if you try to ignore them. Its better to savor them, and stick them in a drawer like old birthday cards, to pull out in future years and remember what it was like to be younger.
Comment #79: Rusty said on 6/19/06 @ 3:58am ET...
Alma,
Thanks, that's very good advice.
I think we're all going to feel much younger on Election Night this November, and will be savoring that evening's rebirth of American democracy for the rest of our lives.
Comment #80: Chemung said on 6/20/06 @ 4:12am ET...
Hey RUSTY.
Get a Grip.
Have you seen the pathetic crap coming out of the DNC these days?
Our "platform" includes things like: "make healthcare more affordable for all Americans".
Yeah, we are sure to sweep the fall elections with sfuff like this.
Republicans are BOLD in their initiatives, and we must be too.
How about Zbignew Bryzynski's 4 point plan for getting us out of Iraq?
How about ending the tax cuts that are "defunding" the US government and passing on the excesses of the Bush Administation to future generations?
The Bush Administation is catering to its radical base. Should we be maybe doing the same?
