McKinney Was Ready to Impeach Bush in 2001

[spillthebeans]

(APN) ATLANTA -- US Rep. McKinney (D-GA) told a recent audience of the film American Blackout that she had written up Articles of Impeachment for President Bush five years ago in 2001.

It was her mother, Leola McKinney, who pleaded with her and convinced her "not to drop" the Articles in the US House, at the time.

The act of writing up Articles of Impeachment is not difficult, the Congresswoman said. "You just write them on a piece of paper," she said.

The stunning fact was revealed only days before the Run-Off Election against Hank Johnson. The movie screening was attended by many McKinney supporters at Midtown Arts Cinema. The screening had been the first "big screen" release of the film in the US after several months of independent screenings nationwide.

"Maybe I shouldn't say this," she said, concluding, "Oh well, I always get into trouble anyway."

Atlanta Progressive News also learned US Rep. Dianne Watson (D-CA) recently became the 39th total Congressional co-sponsor of US Rep. Conyers's bill, H. Res 635. Watson's Office said they hoped to release a statement next week on the matter.

<snip>

http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0111.html

[Buzz Clik]

1. Impeachment in 2001?

Interesting. I wonder what McKinney felt he'd done that was impeachable.

[robertpaulsen]

2. Yeah, wish there was more info, like the month.

My guess is that she was planning on using impeachment as a means of reversing the effects of Bush v. Gore, as she was one of the few Congresspersons to speak out against the disenfranchisement that occurred in Florida during the 2000 election. Remember that scene in Fahrenheit 9/11?

[Bandit]

5. Well the very first thing was ignore the Presidential Papers Act

That was an Act of Congress you know the LAW and it stated that Presidential Papers had to be released to the public no later than twelve years after that president left office. They could be released after eight years but must by Law be released after twelve years. When Bush took office Reagan had been out of office more than twelve years and Bush1 more than eight years. Bush* said he did not have to follow the law Period...He refused to release any papers. He issued a Presidential Decree saying he did not have to follow the Law....I think that is Impeachable do you?

[GreenTea]

8. Way to go Bandit - Very accurate and to the point. Yes, I agree...

with you, breaking the law (and knowingly) is an impeachable offense...because congress did NOTHING back in 2001 and hasn't since...Bush continues to break laws & ignores laws he choses to, even today, because no one has done their job in congress and put the little dictator on trial!

Hopefully that will change.

[jus_the_facts]

3. In early 2002 this is what she was doing...the media portrays her as an opportunist....

....she was repeatedly harrassed for asking about the TRUTH...they've branded her a lunatic time and again for voicing what so many of us have thought since the BFEE's coup.

http://www.911truth.org/osamas/mckinney.html

During the interview, McKinney called for an investigation into whether President Bush and other government officials had advance notice of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

"We know there were numerous warnings of the events to come on
September 11th," McKinney claimed. "What did this administration know and when did it know it, about the events of September 11th? Who else knew, and why did they not warn the innocent people of New York who were needlessly murdered? What do they have to hide?
"Persons close to this administration are poised to make huge profits off America's new war," she charged.

After being confronted by the media, McKinney issued a statement "clarifying" her remarks.

"I am not aware of any evidence showing that President Bush or members of his administration have personally profited from the attacks of 9-11," she said. "A complete investigation might reveal that to be the case."
SLF called McKinney's comments "shameful ... unethical and dangerous."

"For perceived political gain, McKinney has dishonored the U.S. House and her constituents by alleging high treason, and has undermined the sense of the U.S. House in its clearly stated efforts to support and defend the actions of this government in its prosecution of the war on terrorism," Kent wrote.

[spillthebeans]

54. She has this 911 Report 1 year later on her site

http://www.house.gov/mckinney/20050722transcript.pdf

[bobbolink]

60. I have her C-Span 9/11 hearings recorded.

This woman was/is courageous, and has the best interests of the nation at heart.

No wonder she has been vilified!

However, it's sad that so many at DU choose to believe the corporate media, rather than listen to what Cynthia McKinney herself says. :(

Others have died for being as forthright as McKinney.

[sweetpotato]

67. She didn't have to die...

She reminds people of the stereotypical African American woman over a certain age - she is easily dismissed. See movie characters such as "Madea" and the "Mad black woman."

The media cast her in this role and then dismissed her as "crazy."

It smacks of both racism and sexism. Nasty.

[bobbolink]

86. You lost me. She is very much alive. THank goodness!

[Kelly Rupert]

4. I don't think there was the remotest evidence of an impeachable offense in 2001.

A blind, schizophrenic squirrel finds a nut every once in a while.

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. * neglected his duties vis-a-vis the terrorist threat, and there were

people who knew it at the time, even before 9/11. He deliberately ignored recommendations from the out-going administration; demoted one of the primary terrorism experts because he was being a nuisiance about it; dismissed the 8/6 memo by saying "OK, now you've covered your ass". How much more do you want?

Even setting aside any LIHOP/MIHOP suspicions, he was criminally negligent, and responsible for 9/11.

[Kelly Rupert]

7. Poor prioritizing is not an impeachable offense.

He took an early policy direction that focused energy and resources on North Korea, China, and his missile-defense program while ignoring terrorism as a nuisance (which it had been). This turned out to be in poor judgement. However, poor judgement alone is not illegal, to say nothing of an impeachable offense.

[petgoat]

15. He was warned by Clinton, Berger, and Clarke at the beginning

of the year. Clarke had a plan to start military actions against al Qaeda.
Had Gore's election been permitted, the plan would have been set in motion
before Gore was inaugurated.

Bush ordered the FBI to go easy on the Saudis, and ordered investigations of
suspected terrorist financiers (including relatives of Osama) shut down.
The Predator drone stayed on the ground.

Bush ignored warnings from 13 countries, 3 FBI offices, and the CIA.

He ignored the "bin Laden Determined to Strike in US" memo, but he had
fighter cover 24/7 while he was in Crawford ignoring it.

http://www.counterpunch.org/mckinney0918.html

[Kelly Rupert]

21. I'm aware of all of that.

His behavior was reckless and irresponsible. However, the generally-accepted recourse for bad government is removal via regularly-scheduled election. In order to justify the extreme nature of an impeachment, high crimes must be proven. Incompetence and a blockheaded foreign policy are not high crimes.

[petgoat]

25. "high crimes must be proven."

Recklessness and irresponsibility are not high crimes when
they get people killed?

[Kelly Rupert]

28. No, they're not.

Give me a USC citation and I'll sing a different tune.

[petgoat]

36. "High crimes and misdemeanors" basically means whatever

the Senate wants it to mean.

[QuestionAll...]

57. high crimes and misdemeanors...

is really no fancy new definition of breaking the law in a different way.
what makes it a high crime? an official in high office committing any crime - held to the same standards as if you and I were charged. yea, sure, I know that sounds silly as 'they' can get away with a lot more than you or I could, but that's what it means.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[spillthebeans]

77. That's not a Republican issue

Even Republican Ron Paul from Texas wants him impeached

Republican Congressman Ron Paul says President Bush has presided over a system wide doctrine of violating the Constitution at every turn and that he should be impeached - but that likely Democratic efforts to do so will be in the interests of playing politics and not the health of the nation.


Paul said that Bush should be impeached not under the umbrella of partisan vengeance but for ceaselessly breaking the laws of the land.

http://www.jregrassroots.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t18239.html







You are either a criminal and for us or you are against us..........

[Horse with no Name]

79. Not doing your job as Chief Executive IS an impeachable offense

Ignoring memos, reports, briefings against a terrorist attack is an impeachable offense.
It isn't just "poor" time management or whatever the fuck that poster said.
She apologizes for all Republican mistakes in just about every thread.
McKinney was right. Ron Paul was right.
And the poster was wrong.

[immoderate]

39. You are quite wrong about impeachment.

High crimes and misdemeanors is whatever the House of Representatives says it is. There is no official list.

Suppose he goes to Crawford and stays there and doesn't do his job. What crime is he committing? Should he be impeached?

There are things a president can do or not do that can put the country in jeapordy that are not covered by statute and can not wait for the next election cycle.

--IMM

[Horse with no Name]

75. So you joined us on election day?

How nice.
You seem to defend just about everything Republican.
Not calling you out as a freeper--just wondering what enticed you to join?

[Name removed]

9. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[QuestionAll...]

11. how about them missing trillions...

cynthia put rumsfeld's feet to the fire on that one.

wish I had the link, darn.

[spillthebeans]

13. the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eootfzAhAoU

[QuestionAll...]

14. thanks so much! I love you!!!!!! heh. nt

[QuestionAll...]

17. OMG!! that clip - no wonder she was run out of the game.

How anyone with sanity could think this woman is somehow a Danger to the american people or not representative or dishonest or whatever the hell is thrown at her.

you're all the nutbars, not this example of how a congressperson should do their jobs.

!

[bobbolink]

61. Amazing video indeed! Her composure is amazing....

:patriot:

This nation has lost a treasure with her losing.

:cry:

[G_j]

38. & transcript

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/031505_mckinney_transcript.shtml

[Kelly Rupert]

16. Missing trillions?

Hardly. See, this is what I mean by making sure your attacks are true. When you say that to someone, they can laugh you off, because the entire US GDP is 11.75 trillion, and implying that Rumsfeld had lost at least a quarter of the entire GDP of the nation is ridiculous.

According to the widely-publicized audit, we lost $9 billion dollars.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/01/30/iraq.audit/

That is a horrible sum of money. The money we lost in Iraq--that is to say, the money that simply vanished without us even trying to spend it--could have given clean water to every man, woman, and child in the world. We could have offered 56,000 full four-year scholarships to Ivy-League colleges. Instead, absolutely nothing useful has happened with it. That is a valid, powerful attack on this administration, and that's the kind of attacks we should be making--real ones.

Edit: Ah, I see, referring to the Pentagon's poor record-keeping. Never mind.

[QuestionAll...]

26. this money has been missing and collecting long before

Rumsfeld.

and how about the big cheese in charge of the cash that has since beetled off to another cushy job, whatshisname, Dov Zarcheim? I'll bet he knows where that missing money could be

disgusting corruption beyond belief - and a lone, sane voice like McKinney's gets shut down - yes, she's the crazy one.

fools!

and why you are so protective of these scurvy dogs is beyond me - well, maybe not...
anyways, bye!

[flyarm]

85. we can't account for some $2.6 trillion in transactions that exist

i had this in my files...

it is 2.6 trillion to be exact!!

fly



http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2001/s20010716-secdef2.html
United States Department of Defense

Testimony before the House Appropriations Committee: Fiscal Year 2002 Defense Budget Request
As Given by Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Hugh Shelton, and Comptroller Dov Zakheim,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC, Monday, July 16, 2001.


snip:

SEC. RUMSFELD: Mr. Congressman, thank you very much. Your question is, of course, right at the heart of an enormously important issue for the Department of Defense. We have a panel in the Quadrennial Defense Review on this subject. We have met with it twice in the last two weeks. We're obviously going to have to meet with it again. It is a big, broad, complicated subject.

As you know, the Department of Defense really is not in charge of its civilian workforce, in a certain sense. It's the OPM, or Office of Personnel management, I guess. There are all kinds of long- standing rules and regulations about what you can do and what you can't do. I know Dr. Zakheim's been trying to hire CPAs because the financial systems of the department are so snarled up that we can't account for some $2.6 trillion in transactions that exist, if that's believable. And yet we're told that we can't hire CPAs to help untangle it in many respects.

So it's a big problem, and you're quite right it is an aging civilian workforce, they tell me, technically. They all look young to me. (Laughter.) But the fact is that some 40 or 50 percent are going to be eligible for retirement in the next five or six years, I'm told, and we simply have got to find ways that we can be deft and flexible enough so that we can attract and retain the kinds of people that are going to be needed for a very different civilian population in the Pentagon over the next 20 years compared to the past 20.


REP. MORAN: I appreciate that response, Mr. Secretary. We can't afford for all the people eligible to retire to do so. We're going to have to find ways to keep them in. And what's going to happen, of course, is most of them will go to the private sector, operate as consultants, get more money and enhance their pension. But we need to be looking at the long term. I'm glad to hear your perspective, and we plan to follow up with further discussion in that area.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

REP. LEWIS: Thank you, Mr. Moran.

Mr. Secretary, the first time and the last time that Dov Zackheim and I broke bread together, he told me he would have a handle on that 2.6 trillion by now. (Laughter.) But we'll discuss that a little --

SEC. RUMSFELD: He's got a handle; it's just a little hot. (Laughter.)

REP. LEWIS: Randy Cunningham. Duke?

REP. RANDY CUNNINGHAM (R-CA): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

i also had this with the above link..but the link no longer works..

i can't vouch for this snip..because the link no longer works...but the following was also in my files..

snip:

Dov Zakheim and the 9/11 Conspiracy

By ‘Shadow’ and ‘Pax’ – Conspiracynewsnet

In a document called "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century" published by The American Enterprise's "Project for a New American Century"(1), System Planning Corporation (SPC) International executive, Dov Zakheim, called for "some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor" being necessary to foster the frame of mind needed for the American public to support a war in the Middle East that would politically and culturally reshape the region.

[spillthebeans]

32. But the deficit is 49 trillions

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/15/dobbs.august16/index.html


As to our government's budget deficit, again, that's not a problem. Our federal government keeps two sets of books: one that shows our budget deficit shrank to $319 billion last year and the Treasury Department set that shows $760 billion. Now, we don't want anyone to get needlessly anxious here. It turns out that our national debts and commitments actually stand at an incredible $49 trillion. But let's just keep that little number amongst ourselves.




you can't trust their numbers it's all cooked

[Marie26]

48. And who keeps the books?

Dyncorp, the same company that poisons Indian tribes in Columbia, trafficks women in Bosnia, and sends mercenaries to Iraq. They merged w/CSC, a company that provides the accounting software for the Pentagon and other federal agencies. Wouldn't it be easy to miss a few decimals & divert a few billions to a pet (illegal) project? Sure it would. That's why, in the video, the Pentagon wouldn't tell McKinney who does the accounting software for the Pentagon. She knows, and they know, it's CSC/Dyncorp, but they don't want the C-Span audience to know that.

"Sex-slave whistle-blowers vindicated"

DynCorp, a private military powerhouse, fired two employees who complained that colleagues were involved in Bosnian forced-prostitution rings. The employees went to court -- and won.

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2002/08/06/dyncorp/index.html

Corpwatch: CSC/DynCorp - http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=18

[spillthebeans]

62. thank you for the links

but CSC apparently sold DynCorp in 05

[G_j]

40. Military waste under fire

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2003/05/18/MN251738.DTL


Military waste under fire
$1 trillion missing -- Bush plan targets Pentagon accounting

[spillthebeans]

41. here is the PBS story from Feb 2001

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june01/dollars_2-12.html

There's still huge accounting problems in the Pentagon. They don't even know how much money they have or are spending. The inspector general of the Pentagon said there are 2.3 trillion dollars in items that they can't quite account for. That's not billion. That's trillion dollars. $2.3 trillion -- and the General Accounting Office said there are about $27 billion in inventory items that they can't find. It's not a matter of money -- if the review just results war money put into the pentagon we'll be going in the wrong direction. It's time to move back.

[rinsd]

42. He took office in late Jan 2001. I dislike the man but not sure how you pin that on him (nt)

[spillthebeans]

44. Now it's 3.something or take the Dyncorp slave issue and the Pentagon nt

[Marie26]

46. No, it's trillions.

Rumsfeld was actually testifying about this before Congress on 9/11. The Pentagon simply fails to account for trillions of dollars, in all, that could be diverted to almost anything - or siphoned to a corporate crony - or used for illegal operations. We just don't know.

[petgoat]

18. 9/10/01 Rummy announced that the Pentagon could not account

for $2.3 TTTTTTTrillion in expenditures.

The story kind of got lost in subsequent events.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml

"According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions," Rumsfeld admitted.

$2.3 trillion — that's $8,000 for every man, woman and child in America. To understand how the Pentagon can lose track of trillions, consider the case of one military accountant who tried to find out what happened to a mere $300 million.

"We know it's gone. But we don't know what they spent it on," said Jim Minnery, Defense Finance and Accounting Service.

Minnery, a former Marine turned whistle-blower, is risking his job by speaking out for the first time about the millions he noticed were missing from one defense agency's balance sheets. Minnery tried to follow the money trail, even crisscrossing the country looking for records.

[Kelly Rupert]

23. Yeah. That was Rumsfeld playing up the unfortunate

bureaucracy that had plauged the Pentagon and that he had dedicated himself to stopping. You know, his idea of a sleeker, lighter, faster military. His revolution in military affairs.

The problem with the 2.3 trillion isn't that it just vanished. It's that the bookkeeping wasn't recording expenditures. It was spent by the pentagon as allocated--but nobody on top knew exactly how. The problem wasn't that funding had vanished, it's that records were shoddy.

[petgoat]

27. "It was spent by the pentagon as allocated"

And you know this how? If the records are shoddy, how can you be confident that
the money didn't just vanish?

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

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

[Marie26]

51. So how was that money spent?

You aren't the least bit curious about where all that money went, and who benefited? Couldn't it be that at least part of that money was diverted to illegal operations that Congress would not fund? Or Halliburton? Or Rumsfeld? No one knows where $1.3 trillion dollars went; that's staggering. Except I believe the Pentagon does know - they just don't want us to.

[rman]

69. The records still are shoddy;

they still can't account for it.
It leaves open the distinct possibility that it was spend on something that it wasn't supposed to be spend on.

In the mean time there have been plenty reports about fake contracts handed out by the Repub dominated administration, and kickbacks going to those same Repubs.

[Bjorn Against]

58. Wouldn't stealing a Presidential election would be an impeachable offense?

The Bush campaign and it's allies ILLEGALLY disenfranchised tens of thousands of black voters in Florida, and in doing so stole the Presidential election. That is a VERY serious crime, and if that is not impeachable I don't know what is. He did not even have a legal right to be in that office, yet you are suggesting there was no evidence to remove him from office?

[Jcrowley]

10. Bump

n/t

[QuestionAll...]

12. Cynthia has been raging against this machine from early on...

and yet so many people, even here, think she' s some kind of nutbar. She has got some huge enemies and it's so pathetic how easily people are snookered into stupid gossip and twisted stories.

ya know, if you can't back up people that stick their necks out for you like McKinney has- maybe you deserve having Gorge's run your ass for the rest of your life.

[petgoat]

24. See "American Blackout"

Check clips here: http://www.americanblackout.com/

Also find a screening


Dec 12 Tue Virginia Beach, VA Veterans for Peace, Drinking Liberally, http://vbdems.blogspot.com/
Dec 16 Sat Jamaica Plain, MA Youth Community Organizers
Dec 17 Sun Noblesville, IN Marcella Caldwell-Gadson
Dec 22 Fri New York, NY Jamel Cherry
Dec 30 Sat LAUREL, MD MS. CHRIS ADEMILUYI
Jan 04 FULL Overland Park, KS JCCC
Jan 08 Mon Sydney, Mickie Quick

More screenings here:


http://blackout.bravenewtheaters.com/screenings

Jan 10 Wed Sylmar, CA Michael Centeno
Jan 13 Sat Estacada, OR Estacada Progressive Action Community Team
Jan 15 Mon Tempe, AZ Liisa Wale
Jan 23 Tue Urbana, IL Unit One
Jan 11 Thu Flint, MI The Shariki Group

[CatWoman]

33. I just ordered the DVD off Amazon

and plan to make several copies to distribute to my "liberal" friends who fell for the anti McKinney propaganda.

[QuestionAll...]

34. thanks, i've been wanting to see this one for months.

will bookmark and check it out later.

[KittyWampus]

29. Yeah, well... raging against the machine means SQUAT when you're in Congress

It'd be nice if she had some actual, hard evidence that proved there were grounds for impeaching Bush.

But since we all know she didn't, drawing up her little articles was an excercise in futility.

[QuestionAll...]

37. who do you consider brave enough to challenge the

vile ones at the whitehouse?

any comparisons to what I see as bulldog bravery and determination, re: the film clip on McK and Rum.

Really, if you have an example of some other 'more acceptable' congressperson or senator or protocol rake some of these vermin over the coals with tough questions like Mck's - plse supply me the files - I really enjoy seeing those lousy dirty filthy fuggers squirm like that.

[KittyWampus]

52. John Conyers, Henry Waxman

[QuestionAll...]

56. good people! I agree.

they fearlessly rattle some cages too!

[earth mom]

55. Agree with you there...

meanwhile the Impeachment naysayers around here think we're nuts for demanding Impeachment when it's really they who are out to lunch! They seriously need to get a clue.
:crazy: :freak:

[Freddie Stubbs]

19. So why didn't she push for this in 2002? Or 2005? Or 2006?

:shrug:

[KittyWampus]

30. maybe because she had no HARD evidence which is what any respected law maker

would have before doing this- in 2001.

[Freddie Stubbs]

68. So, there was no hard evidence for impeachment in 2006?

:shrug:

[rinsd]

Psssst its likely bullshit. Its a siren's call for her election run in 2008

[G_j]

20. of course she did

that is Cynthia!

:applause: :yourock:

[WI_DEM]

22. I doubt they would have gotten anywhere in 2001 or at anytime under

a GOP congress to begin with.

[KittyWampus]

35. For What? Does She At Least Present Her HARD Evidence?

Any respected lawmaker would of course have hard evidence that warranted these articles of impeachment.

Was she secretly holding investigations and gathering info that somehow other Congressional Dems weren't privy to?

Of course not.

If Conyers didn't have anything in 2001 that would warrant this, she sure as HELL didn't.

Of course many DU'ers will fawn all over this grasp for attention.

[thingfisher]

43. Cynthia McKinney was the only person in Congress

to publicly question the 911 affair and demand answers to the many inconsistencies regarding that attack. She was a "loose cannon" and was marked for political "assasination" for it.
Public officials who dare step over a certain line will find themselves demonized and hounded out of office. Certain proprieties must be observed, even when dealing with the most cravenly criminal entities wrapped in the folds of political correctness.
To bad there aren't a lot more of her knd in elected office today. but oh yeah, I just explained why that can't happen.

[Marie26]

45. There's a method to her madness

The media likes to dismiss McKinney as a nut, but she isn't. She is incredibly intelligent, knowledgeable & fearless. I don't agree w/her all of (most of) the time, but if she was drawing up impeachment articles, there was a reason for it. She was investigating the Pentagon's missing money, the use of illegal black-ops, exploitation of African workers in the mining industry, and the connections between sexual trafficking/drug trafficking & mercenary outfits hired by the Pentagon. There's a lot of dirt there - it's just that no one was really paying attention at the time.

[G_j]

47. true

but sometimes truth is seen as a liability

[Marie26]

49. Often, unfortunately. nt

[CatWoman]

50. Marie

I watched "Blackout" on local television not long ago (on TV One), and was amazed at all the things I "didn't" know (I'm in her district).

She was actually receiving death threats, and was afraid for the safety of her son.

[Marie26]

78. I can believe it

2002/3 was a really bad time to speak out against the Bush Administration - didn't Oprah say she got threats for even questioning whether the Iraq War was a good idea? They successfully cowed every political or public figure from challenging Bush, except for McKinney & a handful of others. She's always got my respect for that. Will "Blackout" be out on DVD soon? I'd really like to see it.

[CatWoman]

88. It's already on DVD

As I mentioned above, I ordered it from Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/American-Blackout-Cynthia-McKinney/dp/B000GYHRHE/sr=8-1/qid=1165451864/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-4318835-3273507?ie=UTF8&s=dvd

[rman]

70. It is because McKinney is intelligent, knowledgeable & fearless

that the owners of the MSM (General Electric et all) *need* to have their propaganda tools portray her as a nut.

[ecstatic]

53. I'm sure she did, but don't let me interrupt your hate McKinney moment nt

[rman]

71. There's hard evidence that there was no hard evidence

for a cause to go to war.
Also there is hard evidence that the Bush admin did have warnings before 9/11 about an impending large terrorist attack - contrary to the admin's claims.

It's good enough to cause Sen Leahy to ask "Why did they allow it to happen"?
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/29/150254

She was holding investigations and gathering info. It wasn't secret, but the corporate MSM did not inform the public about it.

Here it is:
http://911busters.com/911-Commission.html

[In Truth We Trust]

59. McKinney '08! She is a true "Peoples Representative". Please run Rep. McKinney!

[GreenZoneLT]

63. What a clown.

Cynthia is a brainless, corrupt, completely ineffectual twit. She was right about Bush, but a blind hog does find the occasional acorn. Thank goodness she got beat by someone who will actually represent the district and work on legislation that doesn't involve a federal investigation of Tupac Shakur's murder (btw, Tupac's mom was one of Cynthia's biggest contributors. Coincidence?).

[petgoat]

64. "a brainless, corrupt, completely ineffectual twit"

She got Choicepoint to admit that they falsified the phony felons list in
Florida, and got them to finger their client Katherine Harris. Give her
credit for that.

She challenged Rummie about Pentagon contracts given to companies that traffic
in humans, and about the unaccountable $2.3 Trillion, and about the War Games
on 9/11. Give her credit for that.

The organized a congressional briefing about 9/11. Give her credit for that.

[rman]

65. Well, if you say so,

it must be true, ain't it?

[Binka]

66. I See A Clown And It's Not Cynthia

Enjoy DU.

[robcon]

73. Cynthia has always been an ass-clown.

Just more evidence.

[Tsiyu]

74. George Bush and the Republicans

love you SOOOOOOOOO much for saying that!

Bash her, honey. It's all you can do, right?

Cowards abound....:eyes:

[Karenina]

80. (Pssst... Binkers!)

Another! :thumbsdown: ;-)

[Binka]

81. (Pssst....Karenina!)

I got the memo! :evilgrin:

Peyton Sez Happy Holidays!

[Karenina]

84. She's JUST.SO.CUTE.

:loveya:

[CatWoman]

89. she is just ADORABLE

I love seeing pics of her and Ulysses' son :)

[leveymg]

72. W should've been impeached on 9/12

The event itself was proof of his criminal negligence.

Stupid bastard.

[petgoat]

82. They had to have 9/11 to cover over the fact that the 2000 election

was stolen. (I didn't know until August of 2004. That's
what I get for relying on NPR to tell me what's going on.)

[donsu]

83. I've always had her back - more power to her

nt

[bobbolink]

87. I found her DVD for $9.06, no shipping!

For those who are interested:

http://www.deepdiscountdvd.com/dvd.cfm?itemID=DNF620027