"The action I am taking is no more than a radical measure to hasten the explosion of truth and justice. I have but one passion: to enlighten those who have been kept in the dark, in the name of humanity which has suffered so much and is entitled to happiness. My fiery protest is simply the cry of my very soul. Let them dare, then, to bring me before a court of law and let the enquiry take place in broad daylight!" - Emile Zola, J'accuse! (1898) -

Saturday, July 12, 2008

Rove Fails To Appear On Subpoena, Leaves Country

What A Crock…

1) Rove

2) Dennis and Impeachment Issues

3) 545 People Responsible For Our Woes

4) Nation/ACLU FISA Law Suit (Complete Coverage)

5) Dave Lindorff

Ed.’s Note: Though we have experienced a real high with the indication that: (1) Nancy Pelosi has softened her “Impeachment” stance, (2) John Conyers has expressed a willingness for the Judiciary Committee to hold a “hearing”, (3) Republican Committee members favoring a hearing (HOAX), (4) the news that Dennis will be granted that hearing on this week’s resolution; we must be careful and not let up the pressure because: (1) the seemingly positive movements could very well pan out to be nothing but token window dressing maneuvers designed to defuse so some degree this issue before the opening of The Denver Convention, and (2) that the hearing will prove to a totally politically oriented sham.

We must keep up the pressure. All manner of organizations, groups, networks and individuals have sustained, for so very long, consistent and immense pressure. The door is open a crack and we have to stick our foot in it and kick it wide open in every way that we can think of.

We have all manner of intelligence reports regarding John Conyers personal disposition. He has been hit hard, time and again, and if he is truly free to prove it will happen. I know that the anticipated upcoming confrontations in Denver have played into these actions as Ms Pelosi and other Democrat leaders know that if only ½ of what is anticipated to transpire is realized; The Democrat lust for the White House and a “Blue America” will be lost. Privately it is known she wants in the worst way to mute those demonstrations and uprisings in the worst way, and it will in all likelihood be “The Worst Way”.

So Do Not Take Comfort for very long. Renew the pressure on both the House and Senate. Impeachment is now Bi-Partisan and Bicameral.

THE TOTAL IMPEACHMENT TOOL BOX (Stay Informed and Use It!!!)

The greatest service of historians when writing of the Bush-Cheney presidency would be to catalogue lies from the Oval Office that kept Americans misinformed for eight years.

Bush-Cheney lies come in two models--the outright fabricated lie and the lie created by altering official data.

Going to war in Iraq on a lie was outrageous. However, Congress has now learned that people in Vice President Cheney's office demanded that the Environmental Protection Agency and Centers for Disease Control distort planned congressional testimony linking national health issues to global warming.

The administration apparently preferred concealing threats to the health of Americans to leveling with the public with facts that could lead to a crackdown on cronies in industry.

Altering documents to accommodate industry pals has been rampant for the entire Bush-Cheney reign, which has been aided and abetted by spineless cabinet appointees who'd rather be complicit than offend their patron president.

And thanks to the collusion of the lackluster House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who gave Bush and Cheney a free ride by vowing no impeachment proceedings regardless of their culpability, and the dreary fecklessness of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the White House has romped over truth and the law.

Americans have lost their government to men and women of flagrant deceit. Until they're swept from government, Washington will resemble a Third World dictatorship where truth is regarded as poison to power.

What Dennis Has Done
OpEdNews - Newtown,PA,USA
Representatives willing to finally adhere to their oaths of office could introduce articles of impeachment on Cheney or Bush or both. ...
See all stories on this topic

Kucinich to Present Impeachment Case to Panel

By Molly K. Hooper, CQ Staff

Democratic leaders have agreed to give Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich a day before the House Judiciary Committee to make his case that President Bush ought to be impeached for allegedly lying to Congress in order to get approval to invade Iraq.

Kucinich, D-Ohio, has introduced three impeachment resolutions — one against Bush (HRes 1258) and two against Vice President Dick Cheney (H Res 333, H Res 799) — all of which have been referred to committee and then ignored.

On Thursday, Kucinich complied with a rule requiring him to give notice before filing another article of impeachment, which he intends to do on July 14. Earlier Thursday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D-Calif., said Judiciary Chairman John Conyers Jr. , D-Mich., likely would review the matter before his committee.

Kucinich contends that Pelosi’s blessing demonstrates the desire on Capitol Hill to hold the administration accountable for allegedly lying to Congress.

“When Congress is reminded that a case for war was made based on information that has been categorically proven to be untrue, Congress will then want to reflect on its power and responsibility,” Kucinich said.

But Democratic House leaders downplayed the possibility of actual impeachment proceedings. “It is my expectation that there will be some review of it in the committee,” Pelosi said. “Not necessarily taking up the articles of impeachment, because that would have to be voted on the floor, but to have some hearings on the subject.”

“The chairman may be holding hearings. Whether he holds impeachment hearings would be another question,” Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer , D-Md., said Thursday.

THE HOAX (The article from Cheryl Biren-Wright.) (Presented For Your Info)

These were statements from the Clinton impeachment and have nothing to do with Bush. The way they were presented led many people to believe these were new statements. This would have been very significant if it were true. This Is Stupid!

Seven Republican Members of House Judiciary Call for Impeachment ...

Make Sure You Read Below!

Pelosi: Impeachment back on the table!
By TheAnchoress
They’re going to “look at” impeachment. But it’s not really going to be impeachment, it’s just going to be a little look, a couple of investigations. It’s going to be “fake” impeachment or “feel good” impeachment, if you like. ...
The Anchoress - http://theanchoressonline.com

http://nationalimpeachment.org/ ralphlopez@hotmail.com

Bush Impeachment Before House Committee?
Examiner.com - USA
The House Judiciary Committee was given the go-ahead today from Speaker Nancy Pelosi to initiate impeachment hearings on a resolution offered by Rep. ...
See all stories on this topic

[Video] Kucinich Issues One Article Of Impeachment 7/10/08
By Jodin Morey
After Downing Street — If you're able to speak with Conyers or his staff at any length, please remind them that Bush and Cheney and members of their administration are refusing to comply with numerous subpoenas and even contempt ...
Impeach Bush For Peace - http://impeachforpeace.org/impeach_bush_blog

Impeachment and Inherent Contempt
By davidswanson
Capitol Hill is buzzing today with major developments regarding our campaign for impeachment hearings for President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Just today, in what could be described as a perfect impeachment storm: ...
AfterDowningStreet.org - Impeach... - http://www.afterdowningstreet.org

Feed The Storm!

Ellsberg: NO Executive Privilege in Impeachment Hearnings; Bush ...
Bay Area Indymedia - San Francisco,CA,USA
But, if you did hold the impeachment hearings you could get these people; and he could not order people, as Bush has done, not to appear. ...

Congress increasingly going through the motions
The Southern Ledger - Nashville,TN,USA
Dennis Kucinich introduced his latest article of impeachment against Bush. It might have incited a rallying cry in a less-consequential year, but Democratic ...

The 545 People Responsible For All Of U.S. Woes

BY Charley Reese

oliticians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices - 545 human beings out of the 235 million - are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

I excluded all but the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it.

No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislation's responsibility to determine how he votes.


Don't you see how the con game that is played on the people by the politicians? Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of Tip O'Neill, who stood up and criticized Ronald Reagan for creating deficits.

The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating appropriations and taxes.

O'neill is the speaker of the House. He is the leader of the majority party. He and his fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetos it, they can pass it over his veto.


It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 235 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts - of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can't think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in Lebanon, it's because they want them in Lebanon.

There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take it.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation" or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people and they alone are responsible. They and they alone have the power. They and they alone should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses - provided they have the gumption to manage their own employees.

This article was first published by the Orlando Sentinel Star newspaper

Our Warrantless Wiretapping Law Suit (The Nation)


This afternoon, President Bush signed the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, a piece of legislation that will needlessly expand the government's ability to spy on Americans and ensure that the country never learns the full extent of Bush's unlawful wiretapping. There were many good Senators who showed courage in standing up to the White House and for the Constitution, but not enough.

A few hours after Bush's signing, The Nation joined with the ACLU in a lawsuit filed in the US District Court (Southern District) of New York challenging the constitutionality of the Act. The Nation is suing on behalf of itself, our staff and two of our contributing writers--Chris Hedges and Naomi Klein. The defendants are the Attorney General of the United States, Michael Mukasey; John M. "Mike" McConnell, Director of National Intelligence; and Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander, Director of the National Security Agency and Chief of the Security Service. We filed suit along with a coalition of other plaintiffs including Amnesty International USA, Human Rights Watch, Global Fund for Women, PEN American Center, Washington Office on Latin America, Service Employees International Union and several private attorneys.

Why are we joining this lawsuit?

For 143 years, The Nation has believed that an essential element of patriotism is the unyielding defense of civil liberties. Immediately after 9/11, as a fog of national security enveloped official Washington and the mainstream media enlisted in the Administration's war, it was clear to us that the need for an independent and critical press seemed never more urgent.

The speedy passage of the repressive Patriot Act, with scarcely a murmur of dissent in Congress, and the establishment of military tribunals were troubling signs that a wartime crackdown on civil liberties was under way and called for vigorous opposition. Criticizing government policy in wartime is a not a path to popularity. Our patriotism was questioned, we were called "anti-American."

Yet, as it has at different times in our country's turbulent history, The Nation marched to a different drummer and stood firm in defense of our core constitutional values--believing then, as we do now, that it is possible to defend this country from terrorists while also protecting the rights and freedoms that define our nation.

Today, we are proud to join with the ACLU and other plaintiffs in this lawsuit in the belief that the government 's surveillance activities should respect, not trample, the Constitution. Our history as America's oldest weekly journal of opinion has taught us that surveillance powers can easily become a threat to a free and open society.

In the brief filed today in the US District Court, we provide reasons for participating in this defense of our republic. Here are a few:

* Because of the nature of our work, The Nation's editors, columnists and contributors routinely engage in telephone and e-mail communications with individuals outside the US. These communications are vital to providing up-to-date, accurate information about emerging news stories and informing longer-range analytical articles on international topics. Some of the information exchanged by the Nation's editors, columnists and contributors through these communications constitutes "foreign intelligence information" as defined by the challenged law.

For example, the Nation's staff members and contributing journalists routinely communicate by telephone or e-mail with political dissidents in other countries, foreign journalists in conflict zones, representatives of foreign government and individuals with connections to dissident political and social groups. Some of these communications relate to the involvement or alleged involvement of the US government or its allies abroad, or of the US military and its contractors, in repression and human rights abuses. Some of these communications relate to the subjects of terrorism, counterterrorism, or the foreign affairs of the US.

* We believe the challenged law undermines the ability of The Nation's editors, writers, contributors and staff to gather information that is critical to their work. The ability to communicate confidentially with sources is essential to journalists' work. Many of the people with whom the Nation's staff and contributors communicate will not share information if they believe that their identities cannot be kept confidential.

Some of them fear retribution by their own governments; others fear retribution by the US government; still others fear persecution at the hands of terrorist groups. The risk that their identities will be revealed will lead some sources who otherwise would have shared information to decline to do so.

Specifically, we cite the work of our regular contributors Chris Hedges and Naomi Klein in our filing. Hedges, in his reporting on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the so-called war on terror regularly communicates with sources in countries like Palestine, Iran, Syria and Sudan. Klein, in her essential critique of the extension of radical free-market capitalism and the resurgence of imperial militarism, routinely communicates with journalists, political activists, human rights campaigners in the Middle East, South America, and around the world.

Sadly, we believe that the communications critical to their reporting could and would be monitored under the FISA Amendments Act. Certainly scores of other journalists would shoulder the same risk.

We are proud, then, to join with other patriots who understand the government's legitimate interest in protecting the nation against terrorism can be fulfilled without sacrificing the constitutional liberties that make the US worth defending.

Comments (9

PFAW http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=25261&tr=y&auid=3815957

Recapture The Flag (Common Cause)

Help us turn up the heat by sending the "Renew America's Promise" pledge to your candidates!

End Post…..