The President commits a felony, and no one notices

[Harry Monroe]

Published on Monday, August 28, 2006 by CommonDreams.org
JonBenét Died - And Bush Lied?
by Thom Hartmann


I was on the air doing my radio program two weeks ago when the story came down the wire that the killer of JonBenét Ramsey had been captured in Thailand just hours earlier. I opened the microphone and said words to the effect of, "Today there must be something really awful going down for the Republicans. Maybe Rove really will be indicted. Maybe Cheney. Maybe some terrible revelation about Bush. And if there isn't, today will be the day they'll toss out the unsavory stories - like gutting an environmental law or wiping out pension plans - that they don't want covered."

Apparently it was worse than I'd imagined.

That same morning - just hours after the JonBenét information hit the press and just after I got off the air - it was revealed that US District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor had ruled that George W. Bush and now-CIA Director Michael Hayden had committed multiple High Crimes, Misdemeanors, and felonies, both criminal and constitutional. If her ruling stands, Bush and Hayden could go to prison.

As Judge Taylor said in her "ACLU v. NSA" decision (available here): "In this case, the President has acted, undisputedly, as FISA forbids."

When somebody acts "as FISA forbids," the law is pretty clear about the penalties. As you can read here, when somebody - anybody - breaks the FISA law, they are subject to "a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both."

Further, in the case of a president or NSA director, the law specifies that federal agents and courts have the authority to arrest and prosecute: "There is Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section if the person committing the offense was an officer or employee of the United States at the time the offense was committed."

Judge Taylor went on to point out that Bush had not only broken the law, but that he had also violated the Constitution - which many legal scholars would suggest is clearly an impeachable offense. In Judge Taylor's words:

"The President of the United States, a creature of the same Constitution which gave us these Amendments , has undisputedly violated the Fourth in failing to procure judicial orders as required by FISA, and accordingly has violated the First Amendment Rights of these Plaintiffs as well."

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0829-21.htm

[The Deacon]

1. Nope, Only BJs Count As High Crimes & Misdemeanors

[stop the bleeding]

14. Yep - Blow Jobs n/t

[Tekla West]

21. Of course

... they are going to cover a 10 year old murder, after all, that stuff is written, why do the work involved with making new stories whey you can resuse the old stuff over and over. And hey, what's 30 felonies between republicans? At least he did not have sex. So he could not be any sort of bad image to the children. ITMFA!

[ronnykmarshall]

2. Huh?

What does this have to do with JonBenne?

[The Gunslinger]

7. JonBenne is a weapon of mass distraction. nt

[goforit]

3. OMG!!! Bush was running scared at this time in Kennibunkport,Maine.

I remember the decision made by Judge Taylor, but never fully
understood the ramifications.

Hmmm.... I wonder if the the Ramsey presumed suspect was hired as an
intentional decoy?

[Higans]

36. Defiantly a decoy. The DNA is no match to him in the Ramsy case.

They aren't even holding him for the Ramsy case. they got him on child porn that they probably planted in his computer over the net. he probably didn't even know it was there. This Media will do anything to cover the truth. It's all a crock of shit, and it's starting to stink so bad that every one in our Global Community can smell it.

[AndyA]

4. I got into an argument with a Freeper over this. They profess that the

decision will be struck down, because Judge Taylor should have recused herself due to a relationship with the ACLU. I would think a Federal Judge of her caliber would have anticipated this, and stepped down if there was a legitimate reason.

After all, let's not forget Justice Scalia's weekend hunting trip with Dick Cheney, at about the same time he was to decide of the legality of keeping Cheney's Energy Policy member names a secret...

[glitch]

9. And I bet a judge affiliated with the Federal Society would be okey dokey

with this backwash.

[Thoreau-Ly]

15. Correction...Federalist Society

But they don't know what that word means.

So, yes, you are right.

[glitch]

16. I always do that dunno why. Thanks. nt

[Thoreau-Ly]

12. Freepers Love Unlogical Assumptions

That is ridiculous of them to say, of course. And there is no way it would be struck down on that basis.

Now Scalia's conduct was grounds for at least civil and criminal penalties. And Roberts? Hello, Hamdan/interviewing for position of SCOTUS?

Now, I know bascially all politicians are sanctimonious, but please, who has a GOmonoPoly on hypocrisy?

The answer is crystal clear.

[DeSwiss]

30. The rules for judicial recusal...

...are fairly succinct and clear. This topic was discussed almost immediately after Judge Taylor-Diggs' ruling and it was made clear that her membership on a committee that oversees grant decisions for an ACLU committee had no direct bearing in this case (you can search for the posts for specifics). The cases judges are assigned to, are done so randomly and they are required to list all affiliations and organizations they belong to so that vetting of cases can be made by the clerk of the court who assigns the cases. Judges cannot be expected to live in a vacuum, nor shun membership in organizations to avoid potential conflicts. So the freepers will have to look elsewhere for the "magic bullet" they are praying for to try and kill the decision.

Justice Antonin Scalia is one of the worst violators of these types of conflicts that are "real" conflicts. He accepted gifts from Cheney in the form of hunting trips, then later decided not to require the release of the minutes from meetings with oil executives Cheney held in the WH when news organization went to court over them. Ken Lay was among those in attendance at those meetings. And on other posts here today concern reports of all the organizations who have paid him in trips and vacations to "speak" and attend "conferences" in places like Italy and Austrailia. The man is a pig.

As for Jude Taylor-Diggs' decision itself, essentially the Bush Administration is arguing that "a state of war" (which has not been declared by the way), supersedes federal law (like FISA) and allows Bush to ignore them or to issue signing statements that set aside laws passed by Congress on grounds of national security. But that was attempted by Nixon to cover-up the illegal bombing of Cambodia, among other crimes and did not stop a House Committee from voting for impeachment. He resigned to avoid it. I wish Bush would do so as well and save us all the trouble and expense.

[Mr_Spock]

52. Good post

I wonder if the rule of law means anything anymore?

[originalpckelly]

5. You do know they can all also be charged with conspiracy:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000371----000-.html

18 USC 371: Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States
If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.

[FighttheFuture]

41. they should be charged with Treason, and given the Rosenberg Treatment

If guilty, of course!

[sutz12]

6. Please note.....Bush appointed his presiding judge if he is impeached.

Does anyone really think that Roberts would recuse himself?

[DeSwiss]

25. Impeachment trials are handled by the Senate...

not SCOTUS, after resolution(s) are passed in the House. Roberts would preside over the trial as Chief Justice but has no decision-making authority as to the decision. A conviction by two-thirds vote is need to impeach the bastard and drive him from office.

I say let's get started...

[glitch]

8. About 30 felonies, each impeachable.

At least that's what Thom Hartmann said on his radio program this morning.

[Thoreau-Ly]

13. Um, How About

850 Constitutionally unallowed signing statements?

Let's just round it up to 1,000 points of blight.

[glitch]

17. Ain't that the truth. nt

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[magellan]

67. Um, how about

...fabricating evidence to scare Americans into supporting the pre-planned invasion of Iraq, illegal domestic wiretapping that was stepped up before 9-11, the torture and rendering of detainees, election fraud, littering the US media with propaganda, and -- heh -- what the meaning of "wanted: dead or alive" is?

That, along with the hundreds of unconstitutional signing statements, is just for starters. Your pResident and VP are impeachable on any number of offenses that are just a tad more important to this nation's future than lying under oath about a blow-job.

[TheFriedPiper]

69. Haha, enjoy your stay

It's funny that the typical Republican response to crimes committed by Bush is always: "but, but, but, CLINTON!!!"

[Thoreau-Ly]

73. No Shit.

And the rational person is like, "Huh? What the fuck are you talking about?"

[Thoreau-Ly]

72. Um, How About

You are a fucking idiot?

Bill Clinton is no longer President. And your hacks came up with jack shit.

[Der Blaue Engel]

77. Hey, Karl, you'd better find another fake child beauty queen killer, quick

Because your minions can't even find an intelligent bullshit response to "the President has committed a felony."

THOSE WHO STAND BY THIS PRESIDENT ARE TRAITORS.

[fishwax]

81. BWAHAHAHA

don't forget the oral sex part :eyes:

[Just-plain-Kathy]

55. I don't understand...

If we could hold this administration to "30" clear-cut impeachable felonies. What are we waiting for? What have we been waiting for?

If we're waiting until after the elections hoping we win (hoping for no election fraud), WE HAVE TO start explaining to Americans NOW about subpoena power. I speak with a lot of voters of all ages who feel democrats are worthless. A lot of voters don't even know that republicans are in power...And those who do know, feel that Democrats have been sitting on their hands while Bush is getting away with all these "so-called lies"; we're loosing our credibility.

I hate to say, talk down to people, but we have to have a clear message; mostly being 'it's not our fault, we can't look into White House records until Democrats hold the Majority, and Democrats need your vote in order to hold this administration accountable'.

:rant: We HAVE to win this time!!...... sorry for the rant. I know you guys feel my pain.

[glitch]

61. Yes, without a majority in Congress we don't have subpoena / investigation

power. Short and simple. The majority in Congress controls the agenda of Congress.

Until we get that majority we don't control the agenda. No investigations, no subpoena power.

If after we get the majority (election fraud aside) we still don't go for impeachment, then we can all join together to scream the house down about Democrats sitting on their hands.

[leveymg]

65. On 9/12, * could've been indicted for 3,000 counts of negligent homicide.

But, he wasn't. That set the standard for everything that followed. He became a dictator and a law unto himself.

[glitch]

79. I fall into the "indict * for 3000 counts premeditated murder" camp but

I can support this.

[leveymg]

80. Whichever gets a conviction.

Shrub and his henchmen should be hauled off to the federal pen for life, either way.

[Supersedeas]

10. Spot On -- the Corp Media would rather ignore high crimes by NeoCons

[Disturbed]

11. How many Dems voted to confirm Gen Hayden

as CIA Chief knowing that he violated the FISA Law 32 times while he worked at NSA?

[chelsea0011]

18. Oh they notice. They just don't give a rat's ass about doing any

journalism necessary to get the stories out there. It's hard work for the media. Jon Benet Ramsey has all the past stories already queued up.

[DireStrike]

19. wow... what the hell? Thanks for telling me, liberal media.

Maybe now that Thom Hartmann has done their job for them, the media will pick up on this. Or maybe they will just keep as quiet as possible while the blogs get louder and louder, like they usually do.

[mnhtnbb]

20. Katie's first question will solve it.

[underpants]

22. Excellent article

especially the first half

[grizmaster]

23. add a couple hundred more charges to the impeachment proceedings

by the time Congress gets around to indicting bush, just the reading of the crimes and misdemeanors are going to take a month.

[Biernuts]

90. Has anybody here taken any law or political science courses?

Because there seems to be a serious lack of understanding about the courts and congress and their roles.

First off, the Judge's opinion, which is stayed (not in effect) pending appeal is not even in a criminal case. It's a civil action. If her opinion is upheld, (unlikely given her legal reasoning) all it does is shut down one NSA program that intercepts international calls suspected of having a terrorist on the non-US end. No person is on trial charged with criminal conduct.

The determination that anybody, even a president, committed a felony, is a finding of fact which must be made by a unanimous jury, as part of a trial. And if one is indicted and brought to trial, the judge makes the determination only if the accused waives a jury trial.

Neither does Congress have a role indicting anyone, even a president. When Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives, it did not equate to a criminal indictment - and the constitution is clear that should the Senate convict, (which takes a 2/3 super-majority - 67 when the 100 member Senate has no vacant seats), removal from office and disqualification from future office is all that can result.

If there is also the allegation of a criminal code, that trial is separate and distinct from impeachment. It doesn't necessarily have to be before impeachment. For example, Nancy Pelosi's pick to be ranking member or Chairman of the House Intel Committee, Rep Alcee Hastings (D-FL) was a federal judge tried and acquitted for corruption - primarily bribery that included leaking wiretap information to the subject of the tap in return for payment. Judge hastings was acquitted; however, he was subsequently impeached by the House & convicted by the Senate for perjury during his criminal trial. (This was not partisan - both houses had democrat majorities.) Removed from a lifetime appointment in the federal judiciary, he now sits in the House of Representatives. Clearly NOT who I want even sitting on the Intel Committee.

[mikeyj84]

24. High crimes

I've been saying all along the corporate and media ghouls are running the show. Do any of you remember the Movie "Roller Ball" back in the Early 70's starring James Canny, talking about Global economies, and how 5 major corporations ruled the world. Well my theory has always been, yesterdays fantasies become tomorrow's realities!!!

[TechBear_Seattle]

26. Who cares?

Obviously, the American people do not. And certainly not the quislings who run the country's media outlets. We are down to, what, three owners of 95% of all television, radio and newspapers in the United States? And all of them owned by very staunch conservative Republicans? There were five back in 2002, but I believe there have been some mergers since then.

[dunn]

84. Never have Understood Why Ted Turner of CNN gave up his Stake and allowed

that to happen.

[TechBear_Seattle]

86. Turner's greed got the better of him

When he organized a merger of his CNN empire with Time-Warner, I believe he became the single largest shareholder in the new company while still only ownly a minority stake. When Time-Warner merged with AOL, that stake was diluted further. In the last couple of years, a coalition of other owners pushed him aside completely and began to remake CNN into a Faux News clone, with Glenn Beck (aka Bill O`Lielly lite) only the latest in a long line of travesties.

[civildisoBDence]

27. It's about time someone stood up for the integrity of FISA

But, the idea that the release of this decision was in any way related to the breaking Mark Karr story sounds like the worst kind of conspiracy theory...and I hope you don't mean to insinuate that the timing of the release had anything to do with your show going off the air!

"That same morning - just hours after the JonBenét information hit the press and just after I got off the air - it was revealed that US District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor had ruled that George W. Bush and now-CIA Director Michael Hayden had committed multiple High Crimes, Misdemeanors, and felonies, both criminal and constitutional."

News and commentary, left to right

[L0oniX]

28. Ass Carrots and ...

High Crimes, Misdemeanors, and felonies ...by now this kind of crap is to be expected of these ass holes.

[redqueen]

29. Oh there's that liberal media again... not covering stories like this.

:banghead:

[BadgerKid]

38. MSM = co-conspirators n/t

[chill_wind]

54. Yes! As illustrated beyond all doubt right here.

Think Progress went on to chronicle how much time the three big networks had devoted to the two stories that first night:

NBC - 7 minutes 39 seconds on the Ramsey story, only 27 seconds on the NSA

CBS - 3 minutes 23 seconds on the Ramsey story, only 25 seconds on the NSA

ABC - 4 minutes 3 seconds on the Ramsey story, only 2 minutes on the NSA


Within a few days, the story of the President being found guilty of both imprisonable felonies and impeachable violations of the Constitution had vanished from the mainstream media altogether.

This isn't the first time bad news for Republicans has been coincidentally eclipsed by Suddenly Huge Stories.

(more)

Soviet state run media. Outrageous and blatant. It's time to start calling it what it very clearly is.

[Bucky]

31. I have a problem w/people saying "If big news breaks, it's a distraction"

The idea that some pointless, manipulative, or sensational story always gets hyped whenever the Bushies want to hide their corrupt cavortings from public scrutiny is just silly. They're always, constantly, up to some criminal, unethical, or unconstitutional shenanigans. For this "when news breaks" theory to make any sense, there would have to be an occasional lull in the corrupt practices and criminal incompetance of the Bush administration. In almost six years I have not seen their idiocy nor their malevolence nor their utter contempt for the rule of law let up for an instant. There is never a time when they welcome scrutiny.

For this theory to hold, there would have to be an almost constant barrage of frivolous and hysterical, yet irrelevent news being broadcast into our homes.

Okay, I've now changed my mind.

[Harry Monroe]

34. And your point being...

"For this theory to hold, there would have to be an almost constant barrage of frivolous and hysterical, yet irrelevent news being broadcast into our homes"

Most of what is broadcast on MSM television is just that!!! Or was this an attempt at sarcasm??!!

[Bucky]

35. Thank you.

[huskerco]

32. District Attorney suggests Feds responsible for leak

During her Press Conference on August 29, 2006, District Attorney Mary Lacey's office said that the announcement of their investigation of Karr in Thailand was made public as a result of a cable between the U.S. Justice Department and the U.S. State Department. Lacey's office strongly suggested that the Bush Administration was responsible for the leak of the Karr investigation.

[Harry Monroe]

33. Gotta link to this??

[xchrom]

37. gasp! bush broke the law!?!?!

again?

[texpatriot2004]

39. I noticed and I want the Evil Bastard IMPEACHED! nm

[BadgerKid]

40. Listing latest distractions...

JonBenet
declining gas prices
Rumsfeld rhetoric increasing
polygamy
...

All adding up to mass distraction. How to get Judge Taylor's ruling out there?

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rndmprsn]

43. bravo KO! K+R!

[OneTwentyoNine]

44. Whats really sad is 3 HOURS of Alex Bennett crap,nonsense,BS...etc

And general coffee klatch bullshit to get to only one hour of Thom Hartman on Sirrius. Jesus...Isn't Hartman on for three hours? What insane programing idiot on Sirrius "talk left" decided that three hours of Bennett is really Liberal talk radio.

Their ass should be fired. Alex Bennett's em..."show" is just a BS call in and talk about anything kind of crapola,hell most of the time he has to BEG to get anyone to call his stupid show. Wake the HELL up Sirrius!

[electron_blue]

45. Don't forget! Homeland Security is the entity who arranged Karr's arrest

Is that not bizarre, or does DHS normally follow up 'cold' cases by assisting with arresting someone in Thailand? Funny that this activity is not listed at DHS's homeland web page.

Here's a link
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/HH19Ae01.html

There are other references. Just google "Ann Hurst Homeland".

So... what's the procedure for following up on the felonies committed by Bush? Do you think Ann Hurst from Homeland Security will help us arrest him in person? Once she is back from Bangkok, I mean.

[ms liberty]

46. I want the media to answer these questions:

How long are they going to continue to allow themselves to be made to look like fools?
How long are they going to be gullible scribes for criminals and snake oil salesmen?
Are they completely deviod of pride or self-respect? What about their duty and responsibility - not just to the people, but to the Constitution, the truth, to history?

When are they going to stand up for themselves and for America? Are they going to wait until it's all over to report this, when they can then excuse themselves because "the information wasn't out there?"

Don't they understand that this is why no one is watching, listening, and reading them anymore?
They're so busy "entertaining" us, and falling for every distraction that they are blind to the issues that would give them the fame and immortality they crave. Instead of reverence, they will be reviled forever for their indifference in a time when our Constitution itself is in great peril.

God forgive them, because I won't if they don't grow some cojones and start acting like the journalists they are supposed to be.

[Nikki Stone 1]

47. THANK YOU . We all knew there was something fishy about the Ramsey

thing.

Thanks for the information.

[The Wizard]

48. Everytime he opens his mouth

he's committing Presidential malpractice.

[Cleita]

49. So, who is going to try to arrest him?

Or, can it even be done? Do we have any shreds of a system left that can do this?

[lutefisk]

59. The legislative, executive, or judicial branches sure won't act.

Sure, there are good people in each branch, but they don't hold the real power. I think Junior is pretty safe.

[Cleita]

60. Yes, but the military, who keep him in power, can.

Not that I want that solution. It has a 97% chance of going wrong. But maybe if they take custody of him and turn him over to civilian jurisdiction without interfering with the process of law, it could work. It does scare me thinking of it though.

[savemefromdumbya]

50. He also lied about the Val Plame leak - just how does he get away with it?

You always can tell someone lies (BIG lie) if someone touches their face. Bush when asked about who leaked Valerie Plame did exactly that. Put him uner a lie detector.

And back to that poor sweet girl Jon Benet. For all we know she may not even be dead?

[w4rma]

51. Apparantly the Dept. of Homeland Security was in on the "catching"

of this Jon Bennet killer who has now been released as innocent.

The Dept. of Homeland Security is, of course, under direct command from Bush/Cheney. His "capture" was definitely politically motivated.

[Divine Discontent]

57. you know it, w4rma, and don't think that point wasn't lost on those of us

who believe in freedom, true freedom, and respect for the environment, the poor, glbt rights, women's equality, etc... very bizarre that they were involved if you ask me, and this with the big news that he committed a crime according to the judge coming out the same day.

[The Straight Story]

56. Will our dem leaders be all over this, holding press conferences,

etc and so on?

One would hope so, and if they don't, then maybe we need to be a tad worried....

[savemefromdumbya]

58. It would seem we have a one party system

[Up2Late]

62. One thing they forgot to mention, the Charges have been DROPPED!

Due to lack of evidence! The DNA didn't match! I think it was the Governor of Colorado who said that this was the most expensive DNA test EVER!.

Here's the link to the NPR story if you don't believe me:
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5729767>

[mirandapriestly]

63. as soon as they trotted out the old JonBenet case

I KNEW something else was going down. NO ONE is talking about the wire tapping, it's nuts! We have no democracy, we have no justice, and we have no constitutional rights!
They let the suspected killer go for lack of DNA match, btw.

[Up2Late]

64. Of course if people here would stop being such NPR haters, they would...

...have known this, NPR lead off their August 17, 2006 Newscast with this story:

Bush's Wiretaps Ruled Unconstitutional

Listen to this story...(at link)
by Larry Abramson

All Things Considered, August 17, 2006 · A federal judge in Detroit says the Bush administration's domestic wiretap program violates both federal law and the Constitution and orders the warrantless suveillance program shut down. The ruling is the first definitive response to a barrage of legal suits. The Justice Department will appeal. In the meantime, both sides in the suit agree to a hold on the order to shut down the program.

<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5665192>

And...

Government Plans Appeal of Wiretapping Ruling

Listen to this story... by Larry Abramson

Morning Edition, August 18, 2006 · The Bush administration plans to appeal a federal judge's ruling that the government's warrantless wiretapping program violates the constitution. The judge ordered that the program be stopped, but both sides in the suit have agreed the program can continue pending the outcome of the appeal.

<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5669210>

I've stopped posting NPR stories, because of all the hateful comments I got when I did. That or they just get combined with some dead old thread.

Only the totally lame "Day to Day" had their priorities all screwed up (but that's par for the coarse for them), running the Ramsy story first and the wire tape ruling last:

Warrantless Eavesdropping Ruled Unconstitutional

Listen to this story...
by Nina Totenberg and Alex Chadwick

Day to Day, August 17, 2006 · A federal judge dealt a blow to the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program, ruling Thursday that the National Security Agency's domestic eavesdropping is unconstitutional.

The lawsuit against the program was filed on behalf of a group of journalists, attorneys and scholars by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), who argued that their conversations with clients and sources in the Middle East and other areas targeted in the Bush administration's so-called war on terror.

NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg talks with Alex Chadwick about the decision, where the judge ruled the Bush administration could not circumvent existing laws or create new laws to pursue suspects.

<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5665094>

I stopped listening to "Day to Day" after only a few days, because it was already lame. They did run some of the first "doubt this is real..." stories though, the next day:

Who Would Make a False Confession?

Listen to this story...
by Andy Bowers (Slate Magazine)

Day to Day, August 18, 2006 · Statements by a former school teacher concerning the death of JonBenet Ramsey have not settled the decade-old case, but instead have raised serious doubts about the man's confession.

Some observers now think John Mark Karr may have fabricated his story. But why would anyone admit to doing something they didn't do, especially a crime like murder? Slate senior editor Andy Bowers reports.

<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5670354>

Here's a few more, stories doubting the Jon Bennet Ramsey thing was la jit, a 3 minute 40 second 13th of a 19 story broadcast:

Details Slim After Arrest in JonBenet Ramsey Case

Listen to this story... by Jeff Brady

All Things Considered, August 17, 2006 · At the request of U.S. authorities, Thai police continue to hold a teacher in connection with the 1996 murder of 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey. A district attorney in Colorado, where the much-publicized case unfolded, is taking a cautious approach to details in the case.

<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5665228>

and...

Questions Surround Confession in Ramsey Case

Listen to this story... by Jeff Brady

Morning Edition, August 18, 2006 · A teacher named John Mark Karr says he was responsible for the death of 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey in 1996. Now in Thai custody, Karr is expected to be returned to the U.S. for further investigation. Colorado authorites have been guarded in their comments about Karr's arrest.

<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5669216>

and...

The Unger Report
By Brian Unger

JonBenet Fever Proves that News is Broken

Listen to this story...

Day to Day, August 21, 2006 · When the news broke last week of a confession in the 10-year-old JonBenet Ramsey murder case, the news media made it breaking news -- even the suspect's flight from Thailand to the U.S. Humorist Brian Unger makes the case that the feverish coverage is proof that the news media itself is broken.

<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5683808>

[AzDar]

66. Kick n/t

:kick:

[TheFriedPiper]

68. But stupid people wanted to know every move of Karr

Because stupid people were still chomping at the bit for more watercooler talk.

Stupid people are the largest demographic, so they get the most TV aimed at them.

[rhett o rick]

70. This would explain why such a fuss was made arresting Karr.

A huge hoopla was made over the arrest and transport back to the US. All for not as it turns out. Begs the question, why? It could have been handled very quietly. Sampled his DNA and leave him in Thailand. Now the DA can't answer why she did it. Maybe Karl gave her a call?

It gets lonely being paranoid.

Peace

[Harry Monroe]

71. I expect Michael Jackson to be extradited from Bahrain very soon

... on "new" evidence of child molestation when the MSM finally picks up on the illegal wiretapping story again.

Or perhaps they'll be "new developments" in the OJ Simpson saga. Remember, the "real" killer is still out there.

[dogday]

74. If all else fails, maybe they will find Jimmy Hoffa!!

and he will be alive all this time.... Could have the news talking for weeks....

[rhett o rick]

75. Or they will arrest someone for plotting to blow up the Sears tower

Oh yes that one has been used.

[aikoaiko]

76. I doubt anything will happen because "he did it for freedom"

I know, you know, we all know, that this is crap and the constitution doesn't provide for exceptions.

But if it can be shown that he conducted himself illegally for any other reason (self-serving), then impeachment is a very real possibility. But if it is just a power grap, then nothing will happen.

[truedelphi]

78. John Mark Carr looked so familiar

Then I realized that he would be a Lee Harvey Oswald look-alike if he would just carry a rifle and
if his coloring was dark hair and dark eyes, rather than being blue-eyed and blond.
That thought alone m ade me wonder if the whole thing was just a media distraction frm a bigger event.

[fishwax]

82. there really is a similarity

now that you mention it. I didn't really notice before (nor do I read anything into it), but they he does resemble him, particularly in the bone structure of the face.

[chill_wind]

89. Wow, you're right. He does.

Interesting and uncanny observation. As soon as I saw your subject line, that name came to me too.

[fishwax]

83. alas, I have my doubts that the decision will stand

it goes to the 6th circuit court of appeals next. I don't know their track record, but if bush loses again it will simply go to the supreme court. And I don't see them ruling against him. Hope I'm wrong.

Edited to add: apparently the 6th has a conservative reputation. Perhaps their conservative bent includes a strong libertarian streak? Either way, still, the SCOTUS still remains.

[PresidentWar]

85. Commits "A" felony???

I think the federal judge who struck down his fascistic little wiretapping program, and the (at present count) 750 counts of violating constitutional law in that matter, may have a bearing on that single digit proclamation.

[mkb]

87. Happiness Without Great Wealth

     For those of you that can believe me when I say without
any doubt that you can have a very good life without having a
lot of money, this is a chance to exchange some important
ideas.
     Many good hearted people may make decisions based on
trust, and that's good except that in a world where things can
go wrong very easily and predators lurk, trust for making
societal and personal decisions needs input, in this case good
old fashioned learning.
     None of us can be absolutely certain when making
important decisions, but if we prepare ourselves with
information and enough diligence to think it over, then our
trust will probably yield positive results for us and others. 
     I think it's important to remember the starting point of
this submission, because there are many things to do in this
world that don't require large amounts of money.  Do you enjoy
talking with friends?  Do you like to have a couple beers and
listen to some music? Does the love of your dog give you
happiness?  None of these things requires that you be rich,
and yet from my perspective, money and the struggle to obtain
it is causing great trouble for all of us.
     Since the struggle is well established and a consistent
aspect of human history, we need to understand it while
realizing that opposing the very wealthy for reasons I just
said, and because there are other rational reasons about how
they get their money as well.  We must struggle for money in
order to balance out those who try to take too much.
     But the larger struggle involves politics, so we can
enjoy to the highest degree our lives here even as we seek to
extend life into the distant future.  Politics is the way we
run our society, largely about money decisions, and should
therefore interest us.
     I have called talk radio programs for many years now, and
I have mixed feelings at the present on how people should
approach it.
     The very rich control the radio waves, and I am certain,
that with Project Echelon and just simple caller I.D. they can
find out who calls in these shows.  The hosts are rather
slick, particularly the right-wing ones, and they usually make
it hard for you to get your main points across unless you're
well prepared, and even then sometimes they cut you off.  I'm
stressing both the need to get good ideas out to the people,
and also the need to minimize or eliminate your identity
exposure.  You have to weigh these factors based on your
understanding of reality and position in life.
     If your identity gets discovered by radio people, or by
internet spies, or financial transactions you make, or any
other way, don't quit being conservative in this regard.  Try
to limit your exposure, unless you think say, calling in from
home is advantageous relative to your personal situation. 
Others will do what they can as well, I believe, to take
advantage of the good you do, and that should minimize
negative consequences.  Think it over, and Learn, Learn,
Learn.  Be careful about scientific learning. Good Luck.

[rhett o rick]

88. This may be the case where the SCOTUS rules that the President

of the United States is above the law. They may rule that the Constitution allows for unitary executive power in times of war. This may be the case that will decide whether a new revolutionary war is necessary.

"DON'T F****** TREAD ON ME".

[Imagevision]

91. Bush's former personal attorney is now the attorney general>

nothing more needed to be said...

[mkb]

92. Suggestions For Those Trying To Work It Out

     I'm just planting seeds here, hoping for as many fruitful
harvests as possible for benign and good people to have,
especially in the future.
     To those who don't understand the
"complexities" of our situation, I offer these
comments and suggestions to help our world be the best it can
be.
     I mentioned in my earlier submission on this post that
I've called in many times to talk radio shows.  The difficulty
in making sense of things, is eased by starting with things
that make the most sense, and then progressing as much as
possible, based on your knowledge.
     I have much confidence in saying that many people who
have important things to say don't call in because they don't
want someone to steal their "identity", either by
caller I.D. or perhaps other ways that you may figure out if
you "catch on".  Don't be discouraged if you don't
figure everything out right away, many of us are trying to
learn as well, and must be careful how we say things.
     It should make sense to many though, that many of the
wide variety of ideas, particularly progressive and
left-liberal ones, are rarely and poorly communicated on
talk-radio.  In short, this is very strong evidence to me that
many people do not want to expose their identity by calling in
to these programs.  It's taken me much effort to get to the
point where I can say this with confidence, but I think it
could be a good way to help our friends and allies make sense
and do good things.
     That doesn't answer the question of what you should do
completely, but will hopefully make an impact on helping you
decide how to help.
     The same problem exists for the internet, that people can
monitor your activity and maneuver you into a bad situation if
they think you're trying to do good.  However, I suspect the
internet has a greater potential for maintaining a low
profile, especially relative to the positives you can get out
of it.    
     It's more important for me to help you make sense based
on what we see as common interests, and to make you aware of
the problems you can encounter by engaging in these
activities, than to tell you specifically what you should do. 
You may want to read my other "posts" to get a
clearer understanding of my position.  For more advanced
readers, I'll try to write "left-handed" at least to
some degree to help you too.
     Our main foundations of agreement are opposing in mind,
and possibly overtly, the wealthy in our society, particularly
those at the very top of the chain.  If we add to that our
hopeful agreement about what I wrote here, then I think we're
making progress.  It gets complicated and difficult, at least
for some of us, so maintaining personal strength of condition
is important so that we can do the best work possible.  I,
like others, have many problems to deal with that could stop
me from doing this type of thing, so we must be prepared for
change and to adapt if necessary.
     There are some signs of progress, but many
"trick-mirrors" too, so we have to be prepared for
the bad even though we hope and work for the best. I am not
overly precise, so include that in your understanding of what
I say. Good Luck.