The ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.), and the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), were among nine GOP senators who sent a letter last week to Holder urging him to back off from the idea of appointing the special prosecutor.(TheHill.com)
Way to go, guys!!! Ehrlichman, Haldeman, G. Gordon and the boys would have loved to have you in the senate, way back when!!!
Now, here's the exchange that "highlights" the GOP's position that when they break laws, laws don't matter:
FLOYD: That pressure has been on to investigate what went on in these interrogations since long before Eric Holder had this job. And yes, it is correct that Obama has said from the beginning that he wants to look forward.
O'REILLY: Yeah, and he's smart to do that. Right.
FLOYD: And he doesn't want to look back.
O'REILLY: Right.
FLOYD: And that's a political choice. And it's probably a wise strategy, but Eric Holder is not in a political job.
O'REILLY: Yeah, but he can get fired.
FLOYD: That's right, he can, but you can't make decisions as attorney general because you're afraid of getting fired.
O'REILLY: But how many attorney generals did Nixon fire? He fired one a week.
O
M
G.
Not only is Billo The Clown claiming that "prosecutorial discretion" should preclude Attorney General Holder from investigating torture crimes, Billo The Clown is using Nixon - NIXON - as a reason why Attorney General Holder shouldn't be investigating crimes of torure!!!
The video includes appearances by Oliver Stone, 9/11 family member Patricia Perry, actors Rosie Perez, Noah Emmerich, John Doman and Reg E. Cathey, and musical composer Philip Glass, among others, reading directly from a memo authored by Jay Bybee, former head of the Justice Departments Office of Legal Counsel under the Bush administration. The memo was released in April as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the ACLU.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I received the following via e-mail:
Opponents of torture will rally at the University of St. Thomas School of Law, LaSalle Ave and 11th Street, Minneapolis, on Monday, August 24, 9 - 11 AM to bring letters and voices of discontent to Dean Thomas Mengler regarding Professor Robert Delahunty. Prior to his current stint as professor of constitutional law for St.Thomas University, Robert Delahunty, along with John Yoo, authored an infamous memo (1/9/02) for the U.S. Justice Department which advised that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to the war against al Qaeda, the Taliban, and terrorism. The 'legal' advice of this memo helped the Bush administration to legitimize harsh methods of interrogation, which are widely understood to be torture.
Amendment IV - The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Of all of the egregious excesses during the reign of Boy Blunder And The Plunderers - and there were a whole bunch of 'em - none stood out as much as the blatant and wanton abuse of the Fourth Amendment to our Constitution.
And I was highly critical of republiCon bootlickers with their "if you got nuthin' to hide, what's your problem?" attitude; their fealty to the misAdministration simply because it was their party that was basically wiping it's (posterior) with the Constitution.
Candidate Obama was highly critical of Boy Blunder's inJustice Department; as a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago, he knew there was good reason to be critical of a misAdminstration that felt the law didn't apply to them - that justified their excesses with essentially a dismissive "we're at war with terrorism, so sit down and shut up - oh, and by the way: why do you hate America?" attitude.
Boy Blunder's illegal wiretapping was wrong. It wouldn't happen during Obama's tenure. Period. End of story. Or, so I thought.
The problem with a Presidency that usurps powers - any presidency - is future Presidents are loath to relinquish said powers. Candidate Obama's transformation to President Obama clearly demonstrates this, as now-President Obama has done a complete flip-flop from his then-candidate position. Keith Olbermann and his guests on Countdown explain:
I'm simply disgusted, after reading Big E's post, and the links in it, entitled "Obama Administration complicit in rendition and torture". Apparently, the new boss agrees with the old boss that kidnapping and torture and other activities the rest of the civilized world refers to as "crimes" is fine, just fine. Apparently, to the new boss, the statute of limitations expired for the old boss and the old boss' cronies on January 20th, 2009. "Change"? Yeah, "right."
Those that have received e-mails from me may have noticed the disclosure, at the bottom. Due to the recent actions in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the new notice now reads as such:
NOTICE: Due to policy instituted during the Bush Administration, the National Security Agency ("NSA") of the United States may have read this email without warning, warrant, nor notice, nor legislative or judicial oversight. You may not review the secret file so derived nor challenge actions resulting from it. The US President, through the use of "signing statements", further reserves the right to circumvent any legislation restricting this exercise of executive authority or assigning executive accountability. The current US President shows no inclination to change this policy. For this reason the owner of this email account cannot ensure the privacy of this communication.
To be quite frank, I was mighty p*ssed off after the 2006 elections, when Pelosi declared, unilaterally, that impeachment was off the table. And I watched with loathing as Reid rolled over for senate obstructionists and their mere threats of filibusters. They want to be obstructionists, and filibuster? Go get 'em some hots and some cots and some phone books and let 'em. Make sure ya film 'em; put 'em on record for their obstructionism. But make them WORK for their obstinance.
That's what a guy with a spine would have done; but no, that's not Reid. "Please don't filibuster, pretty please!" was his response to a mere threat - a threat they used an unprecedented number of times.
And I thought January 20th, 2009 would put an end to that kind of cr@p; I thought January 20th, 2009 would bring "justice" back to the Department of Justice.
As one of its last acts, the Republican Bush administration had a fire sale of oil and gas drilling rights of nearly 150,000 acres of wilderness in southern Utah, resulting in permanent loss of parks that cannot be undone. This was done in opposition to environmental groups and even the administration's own National Park Service. In impromtu act of bidding, University of Utah student Tim DeChristopher "bought" 22,000 acres of land in an attempt to save the property from drilling and also forcing oil companies to pay more. While Tim is facing charges for bidding without being able to pay, his "purchased" lands cannot go up for resale until the new presidential administration. Kudos to Democracy Now for covering a great story that would not be otherwise covered by corporate media.
AMY GOODMAN: Why don't you start off by telling us what happened on Friday? What did you start off planning to do that day? Where were you?
TIM DeCHRISTOPHER: I started off, actually, at a final exam at the university and went straight from there down to the BLM office. And I saw some protesters walking back and forth outside, and I knew that I wanted to do more than that and that this kind of injustice demanded a higher level of disruption. And so, I just decided that I wanted to go inside and cause a bigger disruption.
And from there, I found it really easy to get inside and become a bidder, and went inside and was in the auction room. And once I was in there, I realized that any kind of speech or disruption or something like that wasn't going to be very effective, but I saw pretty quickly that I could have a pretty major impact on the way this worked. And it just took me a little bit of time to build up the courage to do that, knowing what the consequences would be. And so, I started bidding and started driving up the prices for some of the oil companies. And throughout that time, I knew that I could be doing more and could really set aside some acres to really be protected. And so, then I started winning bids and disrupting it as clearly as I could.
Republican legislative leaders are holding a press conference this afternoon to call on "Franken Democrats to distance themselves" from Senate candidate Al Franken's history of controversial (and, yes, sometimes tasteless) work as a comedian.
Fair enough.
While they're at it, however, will these concerned Republicans "distance themselves" from their party's horrific legacy?
(Okay, so it's another promotion instead of new content -- but I'll have more stuff for you all tonight -- I promise. Plus, these "revised" fans are just too great not to promote. - promoted by Joe Bodell)
Some more recruits to the Bush/Katrina "Fan Club" Remember this?
There is an excellent video over at Crooks and Liars.com with a clip from the BIll Moyers show with the Nation's John Nichols and conservative constitutional attorney Bruce Fein from the American Freedom Agenda discussing why it is important that Impeachment is put on the table. Because of the health of the U.S. constitution and to set a precedent for any president that comes after Bush, that breaking the law NO MATTER of party that it will not be tolerated. As Nicholos says impeachment is the cure for a constitution crisis. Before this clip I had thought that impeachment was just not worth it at this late in the game, but they present a very convincing case on why it is so important that impeachment is to be seriously considered and brought up in congress.
That is why it is so important to contact your representative from Minnesota and our Senators Coleman and Klobuchar and tell them that impeachment must be talked about in the House and the Senate.
(A very good point. Just as the original Supplemental was a difficult vote for Peace Caucusers like Keith Ellison, this one was difficult for Tim Walz. Unfortunately for Dem Congressional leaders, who have done a mostly-good job so far, blame has to go to them for crafting a bill that puts so many of their caucus members in a bad position with respect to their votes. - promoted by MNCampaignReport)
I doubt I could ever be a member of Congress.I say this not because getting a majority of a half-million people in a district to vote for me would be difficult (swine flying unassisted would be more likely), but rather because the schedule, pressure, scrutiny and constant decision making which maps a direction for our country would be very overwhelming.
That's why we send leaders like Tim Walz to Congress.
President Lula was asked a question on ethanol tariffs imposed by U.S. Mr Bush answered it for him. You can sense a level of condescension and from President Lula's reply you can sense he is intimidated by Bush.
I would like there to be a solution in Iraq that we could take ownership of, but America can't solve all things. That we precipitated the mess makes us feel obligated, and that's honorable. But we went in there to combat a phantom threat to our way of life and ended up unleashing a bigger one, threatening even more people, this time for real.
We cannot right it, with our treasure or remorse.
Bush was right to talk to the country about Iraq separately, before his state of the union speech, but it still hangs over him and his agenda like an uncompleted sentence. He is less our president today than a convicted man addressing his victims in court before he is hauled off forever.
I will watch tonight's speech with no intention of picking it apart. That seems pointless. I will watch with no hope and some dread, like a father facing the drunk driver who killed his child. I would like to be above blaming, beyond bitterness. It will not help to say, you shouldn't have drunk! you shouldn't have driven! There is no comfort to be gained from an insurance settlement, an apology or a punishment. But those things must be endured.
This man has wrecked so much, and now I have to listen to how he will make things right.
A year ago, President George W. Bush devoted roughly half of his 5,400-word State of the Union address to foreign affairs, while relegating issues like rebuilding New Orleans, alternative energy and health care to near bullet-point status in the second half of his speech.
Tuesday night the president will address a joint-session of Congress for the eighth time. As he looks to resurrect his presidency and salvage something positive in the little time he has left in the White House, Bush would do well to put Iraq on the backburner, at least for a night.
Sixty percent of Americans oppose the president's reckless plan to send more troops into the middle of Iraq's bloody civil war. There's nothing Bush can say to change that. He's gearing up for a fight with Congress over the war and he doesn't have the facts on his side, he doesn't have the people on his side and many Republican allies are justifiably running for cover.
Bush is committed to a strategy of "Stay the Course 2.0." Victory is within our grasp in Iraq, he contends. We just need 21,500 more troops to help quell violence based on grudges that pre-date the Virginia Company's landing at Jamestown nearly 400 years ago. The American people have heard that song before and they're not buying it.
If he's not willing to accept the facts about Iraq, the president can at least start anew on domestic matters. His 2006 State of the Union provides a laundry list of false starts and broken promises that can be fixed this year.
"A hopeful society," Bush said last year, "comes to the aid of fellow citizens in times of suffering and emergency - and stays at it until they're back on their feet."
He was referring to New Orleans, where the situation has grown worse over the last 12 months. The once great city on the Mississippi River is plagued by violence, has seen half its population disappear and is no closer to rising again than it was when Bush first promised to help. Americans deserve better.
Rebuilding New Orleans is an issue of national importance. A rejuvenated Crescent City will help Louisiana's lagging economy and it'll send a message to the rest of the world that Americans really do stand by their own without regard to the cost. We don't shirk from our responsibility because it seems too hard. For four centuries we've done what few believed was possible. Rebuilding New Orleans should be the first great domestic achievement of the 21st century.
When the ex-oilman turned president proclaimed "America is addicted to oil" in his last State of the Union speech, people took notice. A year later, however, we're no closer to breaking an addiction that's destroying our environment and has us entangled in some of the most unstable and undemocratic regions of the world.
Gas prices are falling, but that's not because of anything we did. Forces beyond our control play a key role in determining what American consumers pay at the pump. While a mild winter has helped drive prices below the $2 mark, one coup in the Middle East or major hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico could once again push prices to record highs.
Governors throughout the country, including Minnesota's Tim Pawlenty, should be commended for their strong efforts to make alternative energy a way of life, but they can't do it alone. It'll take a robust effort from the federal government to wean this country off oil. The president owes us serious leadership on this important issue. We know we're addicted to oil. What are we going to do about it and how? That's what matters. The states are providing good examples, but it's time for a comprehensive national policy.
Last year the president promised to "help people afford the (health) insurance coverage they need," yet 47 million Americans remain uninsured. For these people, many of whom are employed, a serious illness or injury could lead to financial ruin.
No American should have to run a cost-benefit analysis when it comes to getting necessary medical attention. In a civilized, compassionate and hopeful society, affordable health care is a right. Traditionally, the U.S. has been leader, but on health care coverage we're behind the curve.
The U.S. is the envy of the world in the areas of medical technology and treatment. When it comes to innovation, America has no peers. There's no reason we can't extend the promise of these developments to all of our citizens. If we truly value all Americans, none should have to worry whether paying for a visit to the doctor's office should take priority over paying for a trip to the grocery store.
At the close of his speech last year, the president said we'll "renew the defining moral commitments of this land." Unfortunately his actions over the course of 2006 didn't match up with the promises made in January. He talked about a "hopeful" society, but his policies were instead reflective of a self-absorbed administration, oblivious to the concerns - and in some cases, great suffering - of the American people.
With a new Congress, Bush has another chance to deliver, but time is running out. Will we look back on 2007 as another year of promises without results or will it be a year of bold action and decisive leadership?
Christopher Truscott can be reached at chris.truscott@gmail.com. It took Speaker Nancy Pelosi and members of the House of Representatives two weeks to advance their "6 for `06" agenda. In six years, the president has yet to deliver on the "compassionate conservatism" promised in 2000.
In his address to the nation Wednesday night, in which he announced he'll send 20,000 more troops into Iraq's bloody civil war, President George W. Bush said "millions of ordinary people are sick of the violence."
He was talking about Iraqis, but the same is true here. Americans of all political ideologies are ready for an end to the war, which enters its fifth year in March. We're tired of the financial cost and we despair at the human toll as every few months a grim milestone is reached as more of America's bravest make the greatest sacrifice for a terrible cause.
Wednesday night, and at various times over the last four years, the president declared the "advance of freedom is the calling of our time."
He's right, to some degree. The American people stand by all those who dream of liberty while living under tyranny in the most hellish regions of the world. But ultimately freedom has to come from within. It can't be imposed on people; they must rise up and take it and then do the work required to sustain it. That hasn't happened in Iraq.
The Bush administration's greatest success stories in advancing the freedom agenda didn't come on the battlefields of Afghanistan or Iraq. They came in places like Georgia, Liberia and the Ukraine, where America stood behind the millions of brave citizens who demanded democratic elections and a fair counting of the votes.
In Iraq, however, Sunni and Shiite extremists have spent the better part of the post-Saddam Hussein years trying to settle centuries-old grudges. The civil war doesn't have a clear-cut "good" and "evil." It's violent shades of gray and we can't possibly take sides. Whose death squads do we support? Do we support violence-inciting-Iranian-backed Shiite clerics or al-Qaeda-sponsored Sunni terrorists?
For seven decades American leaders have opted between the lesser of many evils in the Middle East. We've backed oppressive regimes in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia - and in Iraq we once supported a ruthless dictator. We can do better. It's time to put America first and it's time to bring our troops home.
This year, as the Iraq Study Group recommended, should be one of transition. As American troops exit, real Iraqi leaders must emerge. But that's not the president's plan. He's escalating a conflict that no number of American troops can really win. We deserve better.
As details of the president's plan were leaked earlier this week, Republicans and Democrats alike came out against deploying more troops. The president, the leader of American democracy, should honor the wishes of the people and their elected representatives.
If Bush wants more troops in Iraq, he must ask Congress. Democratic Sen. Ted Kennedy and Republican Sen. Gordon Smith, a former war supporter, are right. The 2002 use of force resolution is outdated. The U.S. Congress backed a war against Saddam and the weapons of mass destruction threat he was believed to pose. That matter has long since been settled.
If the president doesn't ask for additional authorization from Congress, members of the House and Senate shouldn't hesitate to cut off funding for further deployments to Iraq. We have an obligation to support the troops who are already there, but we shouldn't send thousands more into a cycle of violence that is only getting worse.
The president is a desperate man. Long gone are the days of the leader who rallied the country in the weeks and months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. His legacy is now a modern-day Vietnam. Fortunately we can learn from history.
Congress has a clear choice: our elected officials can either be the president's enablers or they can turn over a new page in U.S. history.
Christopher Truscott can be reached at chris.truscott@gmail.com. There's no need for a joke today.
