IMPEACHMENT: "Did the President ask you to go?" - Inspired by 2 DUers Collins/Scoop

[autorank]

Link: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0707/S00356.htm

IMPEACHMENT: “Did the President ask you to go?”

July 24, 2007 Oversight Hearingsof the U.S. Department of Justice
Senate Committee on the Judiciary Video can be seen here or here.

Michael Collins
“Scoop” Independent News
Washington, D.C.

Comey’s Evidence of a Crime Returns

On May 18th, “Scoop” reported that the testimony of James Comey, former Deputy Attorney General under John Ashcroft, provided evidence of a crime in which Bush, Gonzales, and Card” were clearly implicated. It was apparent that Bush had ordered his then counsel Alberto Gonzales and adviser, Andrew Card, to the sick bed of an ailing and sedated John Ashcroft. Their mission was to obtain Ashcroft’s signature authorizing warrantless surveillance of Americans.

Ashcroft had stepped down temporarily due to his pending hospital stay. His deputy, James Comey, became acting Attorney General. Comey had refused to sign the authorization since he, Ashcroft and senior Justice Department lawyers found it highly objectionable. Over the objection of Ashcroft’s wife, the two entered the hospital room and made their case. Ashcroft rose from his sick bed to refuse. Gonzales and card failed in their mission.

Today’s testimony by still U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary provides a major clue as to the direction future impeachment charges might take, should they be brought.

First a brief recap of the May 18th article.

Tuesday was a remarkable day at the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hearings. The exchange between Sen. Charles Schumer, R, NY and former Deputy Attorney General James Comey provides clear evidence pointing to criminal activity by the president, U.S Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and former presidential adviser, Andrew Card. If Comey’s testimony is supported by other reliable witnesses, the Bush, Gonzales, and Card crew have some serious questions to answer.

The article went on to describe questions that might be very troubling.

There are at least two major problems facing the participants in this affair.

First, the White House attempted to obtain approval for a program that they knew the acting Attorney General would not approve. Second, they sought this approval from someone without authority, Ashcroft. He stepped down due to his illness and passed authority to Comey.

Of great significance, however, is the fact that the program was implemented.It doesn’t matter if it was for an hour, a day or a week. Comey tells us warrantless surveillance on U.S. citizens was implemented without the required DOJ approval due to Comey’s unwillingness to attest “as to its legality.”

Seeking approval from someone without authority while that someone, John Ashcroft, was heavily sedated is certainly a crime. Having that enterprise end in failure and then implementing the program anyway is further evidence of a crime.

The program was implemented without authorization as indicated by this exchange between Comey and Schumer.

Schumer:Right. And you stated that the next day, Thursday, was the deadline for
reauthorization of the program, is that right?
Comey: Yes, sir.
Schumer: OK. Can you tell us what happened the next day?
Comey: The program was reauthorized without us and without a signature from the Department of Justice attesting as to its legality. And I prepared a letter of resignation, intending to resign the next day, Friday, March the 12th.

Both Sides Tip Their Hands: Look at Today’s Testimony in Light of the Above

Transcript compiled from recording: Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) questions U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales at the Justice Department Over site Hearings, Senate Committee on the Judiciary. July 24, 2007.

The following transcript is annotated in italics by the author.

Schumer: Let me ask you this. Who sent you to the hospital?

Gonzales: Senator what I can say is we had a very important meeting at the White House over one of the most important…

Schumer: I didn’t ask you that.

Gonzales: I’m answering your question senator if I could?

Schumer: Who sent you? Did anyone tell you to go?

Gonzales: It was one of the most important programs for the United States. It had been authorized by the president. I’ll just say that the chief of staff to the President of the United States, the counsel for the President of the United States went to the hospital on behalf of the President of the United States.

Schumer: Did the president ask you to go?

This is the key question. Sen. Schumer’s sole purpose is to get Gonzales to admit, to confirm what everyone knows. Bush told Gonzales and Card to go to Ashcroft’s hospital bed and get his signature.

Gonzales: We were there in behalf of the President of the United States.

The colloquy begins. Gonzales is not going to say that the president asked him to go. He begins his first of several uses of on “behalf of the president” as a diversion. “Behalf” leaves open the possibility that Card and Gonzales went just because they thought it was a good idea (“Let’s surprise the boss and get Ashcroft to sign this thing.”) This leaves the opening that Bush didn’t order the trip with its clear criminal implications (See Comey article,, 18 May 2007)

Schumer: I didn’t ask you that. Did the president ask you to go?

Gonzales: Senator we were there on behalf of the President of the United States

Schumer: Why can’t you answer that question?

Schumer knows what is going on with “behalf” and he won’t tolerate it. He makes clear that Gonzales is not answering.

Gonzales: That’s the answer I can give you Senator

“…the answer I can give you…” Why is this all he “can” give. Because Gonzales was counsel to the president at this time, the president’s lawyer. Obviously Gonzales does not have his former client’s permission to answer this question. Privilege applies and this is the answer he gives as the former lawyer for the president.

Schumer: Well can you explain to me why you can’t answer it directly?

Gonzales: Senator, again we were there on an important program for this president on behalf of the President of the United States.

This “important program” is said to be the NSA civilian phone monitoring program; the one that Comey and Ashcroft wouldn’t approve in the form it was presented. The form of the program was so offensive, there was a mass resignation about to occur at the Department of Justice..

Schumer: Did you talk to the president about it beforehand?

Schumer broadens the time frame for a presidential request for the visit.

Gonzales: Senator, obviously there were a lot of discussions that happened during that period of time. This involved one of the president’s premier programs.

It seems as thought Gonzales is saying that there was a request or order by the president prior to the meeting but this is not specific.

Schumer: But sir you’re before this committee. You are before this committee. You are supposed to answer questions. You’ve not claimed any privilege. I don’t think there is any here, and I asked you to answer and you refuse to answer it. Why?.

Gonzales: Senator … if I can answer the question I will answer the question.

Schumer: But could you tell me why can’t you answer that question?

Gonzales: Senator because again this relates to activities that existed when I was with in White House and because of that, with respect to your specific question, I will go back, I will go back and see whether or not I can answer the question.

This is more on Gonzales excuse for not answering the question – attorney-client privilege. In his view, privilege applies unless his client at that time, the President of the United States, waives privilege.

Schumer: Did the Vice President send you?

For the record, Sen. Schumer takes one last shot..

Gonzales: Senator, we were there on behalf of the president

Schumer: Did you talk to the Vice President about it?

Gonzales: We were there on behalf of the president.

Schumer: You will not answer that question as well. Is that correct?

Gonzales: We were there on behalf…if I can … I’d be would be happy to take back your question if we can respond to it we well.

Clearly, Gonzales will not answer any question that implicates Bush as ordering the visit, thus participating in a conspiracy to commit illegal acts, as outlined in Comey’s May 18, 2007 testimony before Sen. Schumer.

Sen. Schumer On Point

Senator Schumer was amazingly on point during this line of questioning; even more so than when his questioning of Comey established the probability of crimes committed by Bush, Card, and Gonzales. When Schumer clearly became aware that he would get no answer, he only gave Gonzales one chance to bring up attorney-client privilege. Schumer asked, “Well can you explain to me why you can’t answer it directly?”

Schumer also stayed tightly focused, to his great advantage, when Gonzales tried on several occasions to bring national security into the testimony as an excuse for the act he won’t acknowledge Bush committing (ordering the visit). At the very beginning, Gonzales tries to divert the discussion to national security by referring to a “very important meeting …one of the most important…” Schumer responded quickly with “I didn’t ask you that” to put Gonzales back on task, Schumer’s task. A bit later, Gonzales refers to one of the “premier programs” and “an important program.” Had Schumer taken the bait, Gonzales would have raised the terrorist threat that was the excuse for the domestic surveillance program they were trying to legitimize (after the fact, perhaps). Schumer stayed on task, focused on who ordered the visit.

Gonzales was damned if he answered and damned if he didn’t. Had he said “Well attorney client privilege applies,” Schumer might have responded: “So the president told you not to answer any questions about his ordering you and Card to the hospital to Ashcroft’s sick bet in order to obtain a signature from a highly sedated man who was not in a position to sign legally in the first place.”

By not explicating the attorney-client privilege excuse, Gonzales looks like a fool to the public. “Why won’t he answer those questions,” the typical viewer asks. At this point, Americans are well beyond a willingness to decipher the hidden meanings between the lines. It simply looks like Gonzales is a slippery character, one they don’t particularly trust in the first place.

Here’s Why Gonzales Won’t Answer

Obviously Bush ordered the visit to get the signature. Card and Gonzales would have broken the first rule of the Bush White House, disloyalty to the boss. Is there anyone in America who has been awake for any of the past seven years who thinks that they would free lance, cross the boss?

Since Bush did order the visit, he’s part of a group action, also known as a conspiracy, to commit illegal acts. Those are outlined above and in the May 18th article. Participation in such an activity is clearly defined in federal code:

Section 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. 18USC371U.S. Code as of: 01/19/04]

Senator Charles Schumer’s questioning of Gonzales lays the groundwork for impeachment of the president based on the most odious crime imaginable, trying to take advantage of a sick man, a man recovering from surgery, a man whose wife has insisted that there be no visitors. It’s not only a “high crime,” it’s a heinous one as well.

ENDS

Special thanks to internet poster aaronbees for posting the video link on DemocraticUnderground.Com and poster Mind_your_head his comment on the significance of the May 18th snip from the “Scoop” article on Comey.

Permission to reprint in part or whole with a link to this article in “Scoop” and attribution to the author.

Link: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0707/S00356.htm

[AndyA]

1. But according to Pelosi, Conyers, and others, conspiracy to commit

offense or to defraud the United States is not an impeachable offense.

I'm so proud of our Democratic leaders, they're doin' a heckuva job.

[autorank]

3. Give the video a few minutes...

Schumer is so precise. He doesn't let Gonzo go anywhere and keeps bringing him back to
"Did the president order this" - again and again.

It reminded me of Sen. Sam Ervin and Watergate hearings. It's gotta start somewhere and
this is just revolting...getting a hospitalized, heavily sedated man to sign a form that won't
mean anything because that man was NOT A.G. at the time; the president calling Ashcroft's wife
to get her to relent on her "no visitors" policy; and the scene where Ashcroft arises from the
bed and banishes them.

People can understand that this was a crime and that the perps, *, Card, and Gonzo are really
nasty types.

They need a reason everyone can understand. This is better than Watergate, a breakin, and not tied
to any controversy, like bomboing Cambodia (which was the best reason to impeach Nixon).

I want the leadership to get a move on it too!

:hi:

[WinkyDink]

15. The signed form would have been post-dated, and presented to the public later---if ever.

Clearly, Comey gummed up the works for Bush, who could never have predicted a man of principle within his Administration.

[Me.]

18. You're Right About This

So right that if you ever get the pleasure of seeing this reported on the television you'll probably flip and think you're hearing voices from the great beyond

[tblue37]

11. I don' believe that. I believe that it is only ostensibly "off the table," while they lay the

foundation for an airtight case that these slippery SOBs can't slip out of. With the Justice Department as compromised as it is, it is a tricky endeavor, and so they are dotting all their i's and crossing their t's.

When Pelosi said it was "off the table," the Dems were in the middle of a crucial election campaign and the Republicans were using the "I" word as a way of scaring and rallying their troops. Pelosi was undercutting them on that issue. I am quite certain that when they have the airtight case ready, impeachment will suddenly be seen to be right there on the table after all. Schumer's questioning shows that they are trying very hard to build that case.

We KNOW they have committed innumerable impeachable offenses, but we don't have the votes to convict yet. But by laying out in public such a clear case by way of these investigations, the Senate Dems are hoping to create such a popular groundswell for impeachment that it will force vulnerable Republicans to sign on to the program. At that point, it will be possible to force BushCo out of office either by resignation or by actual impeachment. That is also what happened when Nixon faced impeachment. They did the public investigations and built the case first, until the Republicans really had no choice but to tell Nixon to resign or face impeachment. Because they had done the investigations, Nixon knew that he would be impeached and convicted if he didn't resign.

[Old and In the Way]

21. Well stated...I think you are absolutely correct.

Schumer is a former USAG, I think he knows how to build a case. What I'd really like to know is what this administration was doing that was so onerous, Comey was prepared to resign rather than to sign on to this POS/CYA authorization. I'm betting that the program was so vague as to make every citizen in the US exposed to warrantless wiretapping by this administration. If they'll out NOC CIA employees for political revenge (or worse), why wouldn't they use the power of warrantless wiretaps to keep track of their domestic enemies (us)?

[H2O Man]

22. Well said. n/t

[autorank]

25. Senator Ervin

It started in the Senate, with his committee. Schumer is a different character but he's so under
control when he does this, it's amazing. Makes him highly effective.

The case for impeachment is here

This is them nailing down the details.

The NSA surveillance program is something that they admit. They say it's legal. Great. Everyone else
says it's not. So present the facts to Congress and let any of them vote for spying on the public.

But this aspect, a ghoulish president and veep, so callous that they run to a sick bed ... this is the
frosting. The cake is done;) => http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0707/S00356.htm <=:)

[AndyA]

48. I do very much hope you're right.

I keep hoping that the Dems have something up their sleeve, but every time I hear them say that impeachment is off the table, I think how much more difficult it will be for them if/when they change their minds. I can hear it now, "More flip flopping from the liberals, they can't seem to make up their minds, first they're against it, then they're for it..."

I guess time will tell.

[GOTV]

75. You are right n/t

[ProudDad]

82. When that DLC FUCK rahm emanuel

last said it was "off the table"

it was yesterday... :grr:

[PurpleChez]

88. I hope you're right...

I hope that the Dems haven't just decided to give in to Preznint Ook Ook and his Dark Master. I'm just waiting for them to give me some sort of sign....

[autorank]

79. Some questions from the previous article on Schumer and Comey

Michael Collins: Comey’s Evidence Of A Crime

Friday, 18 May 2007, 12:56 pm
Opinion: Michael Collins
"Scoop" Independent News

What does the White House have to hide regarding the approval process?

Why did Gonzales and Card see to “take advantage of a very sick man” in order to get the approval denied by Comey, the acting U.S. Attorney General?

Why was the law implemented without DOJ clearance?

Does the attempt to have an ailing and reportedly disoriented Ashcroft sign the agreement represent a Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States (Title 371)?

Does the implementation of a surveillance law represent a Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States (Title 371)?

Why did the President personally deny clearances to DOJ staff investigating the DOJ approval of the warrantless surveillance program?

How many citizens had their rights violated by these programs?

How much longer will we be subject to an administration with the very loosest appreciation for the rule of law and the traditions established over centuries to protect the rights of individuals and the collective body of citizens?

It’s time for a much more aggressive stance on this issue and the larger allegations of illegal and unethical behavior. The gravity of these charges, the history of broken promises and deceptions, and the daily deterioration of our constitutional rights all argue that the appropriate forum is impeachment hearings.

Once Congress acts on impeachment, it may be sufficiently emboldened to restore habeas corpus, a most precious right that the 109th Congress and this administration remove just seven months ago.

[lame54]

80. i need a drink

http://youtube.com/watch?v=JE8cVV6NGxM

[Maraya1969]

95. Welcome to DU lame54

:hi:

[mzmolly]

86. That's not what any of the aforementioned have said.

nt

[Hubert Flottz]

2. K&R...

Sen. Schumer had old Gonezo sweating.

[autorank]

5. Woldn't want Chuck pissed off at me...

...especially if I were a tad bit guilty. He's hyper focused in this, as he was with Comey.

Good seeing you!

[zeemike]

4. An excellent explanation of the situation

Even for us who are legally challenged. A must read K&R

[autorank]

6. Thank you !!! I'm legally challenged too...

That's why I like imnpeachment, some flexibility on letting reality in with that "high crimes" stuff.

This was a low life crime but it's right there and it's time to do it!

:hi:

[cureautismnow]

7. Astute Analysis.

K & R.

:kick:

[autorank]

12. Schumer reminded me of Sen. Ervin...deadly;)

Thanks!!!

[WinkyDink]

17. "Don't mess with Texas"? HA! Don't *&^%$ around with NEW YORK, baby!

[autorank]

34. You got it...and if they don't leave in a hurry, we've go the special weapon...

We'll just send in Koch, have him badger them in that disdainful way, until they pack up
and move on.

You raise an interesting question, who is the baddest ass New Yorker. I lived there for years
but my list is dated. Trump? Schumer, Koch, Rudy G, Bobby Short;)

[Maraya1969]

96. "How'm I doin"?

I vote for Koch

[Senator]

8. K&R

[Richard Steele]

9. K&R

[H2O Man]

10. Outstanding.

Thank you for laying this out in such a clear, focused way.

I'll bet a few of the members of the Bush administration do not like James Comey.

[autorank]

14. Thank you

I'll bet Comey is off more invitation lists than a convicted bigamist;)

He seems like a mild and gentlemanly type but he sure stuck it to them.

I knew that he'd come back to haunt them. It's just a horrid story and all
about the * people being able to spy on us. Don't they have better things
to do?

[H2O Man]

19. He is a gentleman.

I don't think that he is mild, though. He is an intense and drivenman. It's funny, in a sense, that a number of DUers insist on saying that Mr. Fitzgerald is a "republican." Of course, he's not, and it is hard to say if those who insist he is, are either stupid, or have an agenda, or perhaps have a stupid agenda. However, Patrick's friend James Comey is a republican. But he is an example of a republican who, though we might disagree on many issues, still has honor. When push comes to shove, he has twice displayed more respect for country, than willingness to "rise above his priciples" and promote the Cheney-bush agenda.

Watching the hearing yesterday reminded me of the days of the Senate Committee that in 1973 began to investigate and study improper and illegal campaign activities from the '72 election. There was a press conference on July 12, 1974, where the head of that committee, Senator Sam Ervin, Jr., was asked about what they had accomplished. "Some people draw a picture of a horse and then write 'horse' under it. We just drew the horse." I think Mr. Comey will help color that picture in the future.

[lyonn]

97. Reminds me of the John Dean type. When they asked

the question he answered truthfully. It would be fascinating to have Comey sit at the witness table with Gonzo.

[Felinity]

109. Dear Republican Congressional Representatives

Have you ever heard that old Bob Dylan song?

"Come gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin.'"

Now note the comment by H20 man: "(Comer) is an example of a republican who, though we might disagree on many issues, still has honor."

Here's the metaphor (I know y'all find facts and reasoning super-challenging):

* and his entire fucking administration are like Katrina, and the Republican Party is like New Orleans. You are like the occupants of New Orleans when the hurricane warnings became severe. Comer is the guy who caught a flight to Denver, then a limo to Vail, where he settled in for the duration. Would you like to be like him, or would you like to be the poor chump sitting on their roof in the 9th ward waiting for salvation?

Just asking.

Very truly yours,
A Friend

[mod mom]

13. Harman (1 of the "Gang of 8") Wrote in Jan '06 that NSA briefings Violated '47 Nat Sec Act

January 4, 2006

Harman Says Limited Briefings on NSA Program Were Improper

~ Using “Gang of Eight” procedures violates 1947 National Security Act ~

WASHINGTON D.C. ---- Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice), Ranking Member on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, today sent the following letter to President Bush:

January 4, 2006

The President of the United States
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

On December 17, 2005, six members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence requested a briefing for the full Committee concerning certain publicly-reported activities of the National Security Agency. As you know, since 2003, I have been a member of the so-called Gang of Eight – which includes the Speaker and Minority Leader of the House, the Majority and Minority Leaders of the Senate and the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the congressional intelligence committees. As a member of the Gang of Eight, I have received periodic briefings on highly classified programs. However, with respect to the NSA program that you have disclosed, I have reviewed the law and now believe that the practice of briefing only certain Members of the intelligence committees violates the specific requirements of the National Security Act of 1947.

The National Security Act requires that “The President shall ensure that the congressional intelligence committees are kept fully and currently informed of the intelligence activities of the United States . . . .” 50 U.S.C. § 413(a)(1). The Act makes clear that the requirement to keep the committees informed may not be evaded on the grounds that “providing the information to the congressional intelligence committees would constitute the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.” 50 U.S.C. § 413(e).

The Act provides for one exception to the President’s duty to keep all committee Members fully and currently informed of intelligence activities. In the context of a covert action, the President may, if he concludes that “it is essential . . . to meet extraordinary circumstances affecting vital interests of the United States,” limit notification to the Gang of Eight. 50 U.S.C. § 413b(c)(2). That procedure applies by the terms of the statute to covert actions, not intelligence collection activities.

The NSA program does not qualify as a “covert action.” That term is defined in the National Security Act as “activities of the United States Government to influence political, economic, or military conditions abroad, where it is intended that the role of the United States Government will not be apparent.” 50 U.S.C. § 413b(e). Covert actions, pursuant to the statute, do not include “activities the primary purpose of which is to acquire intelligence . . . .” 50 U.S.C. § 413b(e)(1).

-snip
http://www.house.gov/harman/press/releases/2006/0104PR_nsaprogram.html

[autorank]

20. Value added...!!!!

That's a great letter. Here's another.

From "Comey's Evidence of a Crime"If those who continued the warrantless surveillance program did so knowing that the highest and final level of legal authority in the executive branch refused to “attest to it’s legality,” this was “an offense against the United States…” and an “…agency thereof” (DOJ). The several responsible were fully oriented and aware of their decisions.

Earlier this year, Cong. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) and Cong. Henry Waxman (D-CA) pressed the Department of Justice to explain the approval, process for this warrantless surveillance program. Their letter mentions that DOJ staffers investigating this concern were denied security clearances effectively ending the investigation for a period in January 2006. Cong. Hinchey notes that Attorney General Gonzales said that president Bush had personally denied the clearances.

What does the White House have to hide regarding the approval process?

---------------------
Letter to Gonzales from Cong. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY)
http://tinyurl.com/27eaz7
01/25/2007

House Members Say Recent Administration Decision
To Move Program To FISC Raises More Questions

Washington, DC - One week after U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales announced that the NSA warrantless surveillance program would soon be subject to the approval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) and several of his House colleagues, including House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) today called on the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) Inspector General to expand his investigation of the program.

Hinchey, Waxman, and three other House Democrats today sent a letter to Inspector General Glenn Fine, asking him to determine why the Bush administration suddenly reversed its policy and allowed the NSA spy program to be subject to FISC approval. The House members also asked Fine to examine a series of specific questions related to the creation and evolution of the warrantless surveillance program. In response to requests from Hinchey and others, Fine opened an investigation into the NSA program in November, but said it would only be focused on how DOJ operated within the structure of the NSA program.

"We hope that the administration's recent announcement that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court will be charged with the task of overseeing the NSA surveillance program will not distract from the fact that this investigation is very necessary and important," Hinchey, Waxman, and their House colleagues wrote to Fine. "More than ever, we are determined to find out the answers about the origins and evolution of the program. Thus, we request that you broaden your investigation..

[mod mom]

29. GANG OF 8 DEMS KNEW PROGRAMS WERE ILLEGAL. Although bound to secrecy

1. Why didn't they threaten to resign as did Comey, Mueller and others over this illegal activity since they were not in power at the time?
and

2 .WHY DIDN'T THEY MOVE TO DEFUND THE ILLEGAL PROGRAM THE MINUTE THEY CAME TO POWER?

Is this why Impeachment is off the table?

There are some interesting posts over at Muckraker that that pose some very interesting discussion of this subject:

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003770.php#comments

[Old and In the Way]

36. Excellent questions.

The 4 Democrats who were part of the Gang of 8 really need to go on record about this. Looks like Harmon did....Daschale is out of Congress, but what about the other 2?
It's a crazy "Catch 22" situation where there may have been illegal acts going on, but the "Gang of 8" aren't necessarilly lawyerrs, can't get advice on the Constitutionality of the program, and can't divulge details. Their only course really would have been to resign from their Comittee assignment.

[mod mom]

38. Rockefeller, Pelosi and

There are some good articles here:

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003770.php

the were opposed to the program, but knowing it was illegal why wasn't it de-funded the minute they came to power?

[Old and In the Way]

46. Here's a quote from Harmon

"Similarly, Senate Intelligence Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) said there was only one program that the Gang of Eight was briefed on, and it was the program the president already has confirmed. Plus, both Harman and Rockefeller said the Congressional briefings were limited in scope. “We were briefed on the operational details — period — not the legal underpinnings,” Harman said.

So they weren't briefed on the legal underpinnings....but they were sworn to secrecacy (and obviously, that would preclude an outside legal opinion). I wonder if Harmaon put this in writing to the AG....and has a answer?


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1430466&mesg_id=1430466

[Sparkly]

16. I heard that exchange as a cover-up for Cheney, not Bush.

"On behalf of the president" was obviously a way of avoiding saying who sent him. I guess I always tend to think they're hiding Cheney's actual power as pseudo-president, but this rationale makes sense as well.

[autorank]

23. Could be but Bush made the call to the George Washington Univ. Hospital...

...to speak with Mrs. Ashcroft.

"• Forced call to a very ill man. Ashcroft’s wife ordered that no calls come through to the sick and disoriented Ashcroft. Only one caller was able to override her instructions. Comey testified, “I have some recollection that the call was from the president…” The White House call was reported to Comey by David Ayers, Ashcroft’s chief of staff. Mrs. Ashcroft told Ayers that the caller indicated that then presidential counsel Alberto Gonzalez and Bush adviser Andrew Card were on their way to the hospital."

From: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0705/S00343.htm

I did get the impression that Cheney was a part of it. He must be pulling his hair out by now.

[Lifelong Protester]

87. My favorite part of that line of questioning

was when Schumer asked Gonzo if he started talking about national security issues in front of Mrs. Ashcroft who had NO SECURITY CLEARANCE!

As a person old enough to remember being absolutely GLUED to the set during Watergate, I thought Schumer and Leahy, as well as Spector, did a fantastice job, really really fantastic in that hearing yesterday. I also enjoyed the group that kept yelling 'RESIGN' & "RESPECT THE CONSTITUTION' everytime Gonzo's gang left for the break.

I have my autographed print of Sam Ervin right here (he didn't have photos, but a nice print of himself) and I see he is smiling...

[PA Democrat]

24. Thanks. That's a fascinating analysis.

Kudos to Schumer. Looks like he learned a thing or two at Harvard Law School.

[Old and In the Way]

26. As an adjunct to this, we now have 3 of the 8 members disputing

that they agreed that the program was needed and required immediate approval from the USAG (if I understand this point correctly). So did this administration lie about the approvals they had from the Gang of 8 when trying to strong arm Ashcroft's signature? Isn't that itself, evidence of a crime?

[autorank]

30. Piling on is a virtue in this case.

Absolutely! Thanks and I hope people pay attention to that one.

I'd say that the hospital visit and the authorization are, what "some say" is a "target rich environment."

This is the one that lays out the case http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0707/S00356.htm

These people need to go and go now!

:hi:

[WritersBlock]

27. Hang on- Isn't the AG the nation's chief prosecutor? So what's he doing acting as *'s counsel??

If Gonzo considers himself to be *'s counsel, then I want him off the public payroll, and I want him to repay every penny of salary he's been paid since taking the AG job, because I'm pretty sure that, as head of the Department of Justice, the AG is supposed to be a public prosecutor, not a private lawyer.

[autorank]

31. One of my favorites, a proud "Senator" - taking on the mantel of "Madam's" public servant.

Gonzo had John Dean's old job, Counsel to the President before, after reviewing his dastardly acts and violations of the constitution, he was appointed Attorney General of the U.S. Nothing succeeds like failure in this town;)

Nice bath and towel set, very ... stylish:evilgrin:

[tblue37]

35. At the time of the hospital visit, he was WH Counsel, not

AG.

[WritersBlock]

43. So he was. Still makes one wonder why the pResident's own attorney was involved in this

at all, though. Grrrr.......

[TheBaldyMan]

105. Gonzo was Bush's counsel at that time, he later became USAG

he is using client-attorney privacy to avoid saying who sent him.

He also refuses to mention Cheney, this could be a smokescreen to drag national security into it. I suspect that if GWB claims executive privilege to keep Cheney out of it and Cheney was involved in a four-way conspiracy that would be another obstruction of justice felony on the part of the President, although IANAL so don't take that as gospel.

[bdamomma]

28. sounds impeachable to me, impeach the bastards!!

[autorank]

32. It's that time!

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

33. Great composition!!! My fave, "conspiracy to commit fraud". 18 USC 371 (1/ 19/04).

My, oh, my!! Just think of all the activities by these thugs which would fall within 18 USC 371!!!

[autorank]

39. They get together all the time. Ever hear of them doing anything legal?

Takes a big code to reign in a big country;)

[L. Coyote]

50. "imprisoned not more than five years" We need more counts!

Five times five equals 25. Now I get it, Congress is waiting for more counts so they can do 25 years!

[arendt]

37. Wow - a real news report! Many thanks for being a journalist instead of a pundit or a stenographer.

This is what news is supposed to do: boil down events into their most important
points; put those points in a context for the reader; keep the writer's personality
and opinions as far out of the story as possible.

Its been so long since I have seen someone do that in the time frame of "news"
(i.e., within 24 hours of the event) that I almost forgot what it was like.

Oh, but this was for a news outlet in New Zealand! One of those quaint countries
where they still believe in democracy and the rule of law. What was I doing,
thinking that America had journalism? :-)

Keep up the great work.

arendt

[autorank]

40. Je suis Americaine...mais althecat says Gidday;) Thanks!

Especially for the conceptual clarification, existential jolt from this...

which you wrote:

McClellan Democrats... a quick but thorough guide to where we're really at!


:hi:

[Joe Chi Minh]

41. What arendt says with bells on. In the UK, only party groupies know

a fraction of what's going on.

Studiously ignoring the 'elephant in the living room', the homicidally lawless effects on the country, of the corporatism sponsored by successive far right-wing governments over the past 27 years, our most august news and current affairs people drivel on like half-wits in studio discussions, etc., sometimes with some American Republican nut, about matters that are clearly the iniquitous outcome of allowing the unfettered growth of deranged, runaway corporatism.

Tops marks to you and althecat, shipmate, for showing us what journalism could be like.

[msedano]

42. Pepino and Señor Granpa 'splains it all

Gonzales is a total puke and despite his putative loyalty to the prickident I can easily believe Gonzo taking it upon himself to go get the sick guy's sig so AG can take it to the guy in the Offal Office and earn an attaboy.

the historical model for Gonzales' toadying behavior is television's "The Beverly Hillbillies" and JebClampett's loyal gardener Pepino. Pepino was always gratefully absorbing a bashing from granpa Clampett or coming up with one wild hair up his ass scheme after another because that's what conquered people do. Gonzales is, by these tokens, what we chicanos call a "vencido", a totally defeated person bereft of native character and at the beck and call of his masters.

either that or Gonzales is Lucy to shrub's Ricky, and this is another one of the wild ass schemes that Ricky's gonna have to bail out Tony for.

or earlier, it's Laurel and Hardy, and Ollieshrub says to Stangonzales, "this is another fine mess you've gotten me into".

jeez, this adminstration's crap is so bad it's gotta be inspired by television sitcoms. life imitating crappy art.

wake me when it's over, or change the friggin' channel.

mvs
c/s

http://labloga.blogspot.com
http://readraza.com

[autorank]

44. msedano is in the house! The Superior craftsman!

Some of us aren't old enough to remember the Beverley Hillbillies and Lucy but I've got Nick on
my cable and checked them out.

Pepito is such a brutal comparison but then Gonzo has authored a lot of torture. Lucy shares my
birthday so I'm fond of her. I'll go with Pepito. But you know how it works, even Pepito has
his own "PP" (Personal Pepito). Shit rolls down hill and I think that the WH crew has been hanging
around in a few to many valleys.

They have others fight for them, torture for them; you think they peel their own grapes?

How about that Schumer! Was than an amazing cross. You and I probably did that well in our
most creative moments of imagination. He's got it all together, even his temper which can be
vintage New York (I say that as a high compliment). His little movements of annoyance...he knows
the deal. It's brilliant. The Comey tape is at the other link, also by Schumer. He's great
there too, like a very kind prosecutor upset at what Comey had to endure. The man is a
consummate professional and he's doing us all a great favor.

Just relaxing, trying to absorb it all, little Zen now and then.

Perfect day for me to read La Bloga, http://labloga.blogspot.com/ Thanks for that. It will be
an afternoon break worth taking.

PEACE Very Soon!!!

[Old and In the Way]

45. It occurs to em that this is a very well written piece.

I'd like to see more of this stuff in the media. We are talking complex issues and sometimes transcripts/reporting of the statements really doesn't get to the underlining points. Now, I know that this is verbotten for traditional MSM reporting and the RW could certainly frame their comments in a precisely different, pro-administration way....but at least the typical apolitical consumer could have a better understanding of why this testimony is happening, why it is important, and what the underlining story is all about. We do this at DU....but traditional media could run the story and then give both pro/con opinions as to what the important points are and let the viewer decide which opinion makes sense in light of what he knows about the players and the background from which the story develops.

[autorank]

61. Thanks! I wish they'd do it that way to. It wouldn't be that hard.

They're always whining about money.

They could find the people if they made an effort. I wrote something a couple of years ago that would have been about three articles. The research was all there but they wouldn't take it...too controversial. Since when is free controversial;)

[Supersedeas]

47. And where the HELL is the MSM, oh right -- Lindsay Lohan watch part deux

[L. Coyote]

49. May 15, 2007. Comey testifies President is a criminal AND Falwell dies.

Comey's testimony should have been the GIANT story of the day "former Deputy Attorney General James Comey provides clear evidence pointing to criminal activity by the president" on that day. Instead, the Good Lord was taking care of his flock of criminals on that day, providing a major distraction by calling home Jerry to his side or sending him to hell. You have to love the coincidence in all this, with Falwell doing one last favor for his team, taking his final fall on that very day. The Good Lord sure does work in mysterious ways.

Yesterday was a GREAT DAY for Falwell TO DIE. Or, the Buffalo Jump to Hell.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x899312

[Hubert Flottz]

51. I will call your attention to this date, March 10, 2004...

I wonder why it was suddenly SOOOO important on that date to get the legal go ahead from the DOJ, to tap phones and probably computers and to sneak and peek? I think the reason was, they needed to cover their asses, in case the domestic spy operation was detected. I think their main objective was, that they wanted to collect Karl Rove's "Math" for him on all the politicians who were up for election in the presidential primaries, which were in progress, on or near that date and to be able to spy on the eventual primary winner, along with other people who were running for important seats in congress.

It was a way to spy on every politician and money donor in the country. The Bush Gang rigged elections, they junked the DOJ and they started a war to win elections, why wouldn't they spy on the people running for office too?

[The Stranger]

52. Reason Number 5,429,210 to impeach.

[Nothing Without Hope]

53. Gonzo and the WH are banking on being able to block any action by the DOJ,

by the reluctant Congress, and by their hand-picked activist judges. This is what it comes down to, just as we've always expected. Were they able to corrupt the system so far that they are now beyond justice? Everything rides on this.

Thanks, autorank! K & R

[Kurovski]

54. K&R. Terrific report and many thoughtful responses.

All-around worthwhile read.

Thanks to evahbody. I found tblue37's response especially interesting.

I hope she's correct about the Dems working for a strong case. It makes sense to me.

In the mean time, let's keep talking impeachment with those around us. Calling, writing LTTE, etc. Let's help to nurture the groundswell for impeachment wherever we can.

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

57. I agree about talking up impeachment

Its amazing when you start to talk to people about it, how many are in favor. They need to be encouraged to contact their congresscritters and let them know how they feel.

[Kurovski]

58. Absolutely. Congress needs a wave to ride on...

or something like that.

The frustration is palpable amoung we folks out here, and mentioning impeachment helps a great deal in many instances.

The more it's mentioned, the better an idea it seems to be. Here on DU there have been many folks who were initially against impeachment who have eventually switched their views to match those of us who were :evilgrin: correct on impeachment all along.

Actually, and all joking aside, I deeply appreciate the careful though people have been putting into their decisions about impeachment.

[autorank]

62. Thanks Kurovoski. You've got my vote!

This is an excellent thread, I completely agree.

Now, back to paying the rent;)

:hi:

[understandinglife]

55. Once again -- file inherent contempt charges against Bush & Cheney ...

.... then charge all their minions with the vast crimes that each of them has committed.

It must be "TOP DOWN" in this case ....


Peace.

[autorank]

64. Contempt all around for the liars who pretend to rule.

When in fact it's just authority as a means of self aggrandizement and theft. Nice system for them
until now. The push back won't start with Congress. It will start with the people who grow weary
with th impertinence of those who fail at everything they do (except stealing elections and other
items of great value).
:thumbsup:

[REACTIVATED IN CT]

56. Thanks for splaining this

I thought he was trying to get AGAG to admit that Darth Cheney has sent him.

K&R

[autorank]

65. It's all about #1, Cheney is just desert or the salad.

This is such a mean spirited thing to do, so juvenile, it's got to be *.

Thank you!

[bleever]

59. Exceptionally well done, sir.

Your body of work grows more impressive each week, and deserves to be seen by as many people as possible.

:patriot:

[autorank]

66. Appreciated!!!

On being seen, I'm going to hang out at that Today Show window in NYC. Lied there 10 years and
never even knew where it was (& I certainly wasn't awake when they were shooting). But then I'll
have to be anonymous. If you see a guy with a bag, it's me;)

You think they're sweating? If I was guilty as Hell, I wouldn't sleep I knew Charles Schumer going
doing the grilling. The is superb.

Best to you!!!!

We can always hope Sen. Schumer lets a shot at this one;)


Bleever & the White Whale

[DemoTex]

60. Gonzo is so far out of his league it is pathetic.

K&R, bigtime.

:kick:

[autorank]

67. Bush league sound about right...

He's flippant and so lame he doesn't know when he's been down for an 8 count.

If it had gone on four or five more minutes, it would have been a technical knowk out.

Maybe he'll head for Marion Ohio (Fed pen) instead of Texas when this is over. You've got
enough lawyers anyway.

I think Schumer would be a great Attorney General. "Scared straight" and that's just his staff;)

[Lifelong Protester]

89. How did he perfect that stupid blank look that he does so well?

n/t but K & R

[bobbolink]

63. K&R n/t

[donkeyotay]

68. Remember Russell Tice, the NSA whistleblower?

Published on Wednesday, January 11, 2006 by ABC News
NSA Whistleblower Alleges Illegal Spying
Former Employee Admits to Being a Source for the New York Times

by Brian Ross

Tice says the technology exists to track and sort through every domestic and international phone call as they are switched through centers, such as one in New York, and to search for key words or phrases that a terrorist might use. ...

According to Tice, intelligence analysts use the information to develop graphs that resemble spiderwebs linking one suspect's phone number to hundreds or even thousands more. ...

President Bush has admitted that he gave orders that allowed the NSA to eavesdrop on a small number of Americans without the usual requisite warrants.

But Tice disagrees. He says the number of Americans subject to eavesdropping by the NSA could be in the millions if the full range of secret NSA programs is used.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0111-01.htm



Also, I recall remembering that Bush didn't let investigators have security clearance so they could investigate.

[autorank]

71. Great information...

Right, on the clearances, he denied people who would have been less than aggressive, as I understand it,
clearances. That's how paranoid he is!

Tice is right, Tice was silenced.

Thanks for that information.

[Independent_Liberal]

69. Inherent contempt citations went out to Bolten and Miers today.

All I can is it's about damn time.

What do you think of these matches, Auto?

Patrick Leahy=Sam Ervin
Arlen Specter=Howard Baker
John Conyers=Peter Rodino

Later!

IL

:)

[autorank]

72. Independent Liberal thanks, I agree with all of the matches.

Those are three of your best (there are about 30 or so Watergate - CurrentGate matches I.L. has devised)

Good, cite them, jail them. Enough. We don't get away with this crap.

"Dear Judge: I have no intention of coming to court for (pick one:

1) my ticket;
2) my divorce;
3) my trial (for anything).

You see judge, I just don't recognice your authority.

Tata Your Honor

Member of friend of member
of the * Administration"

Go get thouse ghouls Independent_Liberal!

:thumbsup:
:thumbsup:
:thumbsup:

[colorado_ufo]

70. Excellent job by Sen. Schumer.

[janx]

73. They're laying some serious groundwork here!

Schumer knew exactly what Gonzo was doing, and Gonzo knew exactly what Schumer was doing--hence Gonzo's expressions. For a minute it looked as if he was going to cry.

[camusrebel]

74. If you want to end the madness

get your Rep. to support Kucinich's resolution to start impeachment investigations of cheney. It's House Resolution 333. We already have 13 or so signed on!
Just need a few more. Demand your representative do his job! Make it happen. Act now, today or you will rue the day of your cowardice.

You may not have the intestinal fortitude to do a sit in at his/her office .....but if we all do everything we are capable of.....it will come to pass.

[Mr. Ected]

76. But Mainstream America Is Asleep At the Wheel

For any of this to gain any POLITICAL traction, Americans will need to be convinced that the alleged crimes perpetrated by the Bush syndicate are worthy of impeachment and criminal prosecution.

Problem is, most Americans won't buy it...because they won't UNDERSTAND it.

Simple lies about ORAL SEX is something any idiot can get hyped up about.

But "WE'RE AT WAR". "This is political". "Democrats are all about regaining power".

Sorry, folks. We can win this battle ideologically, factually, and most likely in the courts.

But I'm not convinced that Joe Sixpack will jump on the bandwagon...and to lose Joe Sixpack is to lose Election 2008.

Just sayin'.

[L. Coyote]

77. Not in my town!

Download the deskpicture at 1280 pixels: http://jqjacobs.net/politics/impeach/

[autorank]

78. On the DNC Blog - "Did the President tell you to go?"

DNC's Blog

[ProudDad]

81. I'm beginning to suffer from disappointment fatigue

but, damn, this should bring on impeachment if nothing else will...

Bush orders them to force the ill, sedated, Ashcroft to ok their illegal wiretapping of We the People...:wtf:

[autorank]

91. Excellent summary sentence...

Disappointment means we still have a chance, but missed it. Sin actually translates to "missed the mark" so we've "sinned";)

But screw it, we're the ones with the time. They've probably got a building full of condos in Dubai City or where ever. Lets show them the door.

It will be worth the wait!

[marions ghost]

83. kick

n/t

[FogerRox]

84. Gonzo, wrong in so many ways, Autorank, right on Bro ! !

[autorank]

92. Gonzo needs political reeducation. I've got the solutoin.

A FULL YEAR WITH OPRAH, as her production assistant.

He's a follower, gullible, willing to absorb the mission of his leader.

Well, Oprah is almost as good as Gore for president in 2008. She could
fix the guy up.
:sarcasm:
You think she'll return my calls.

[Imagevision]

85. Excellant piece, Gonzo will go to the mat for * and push come to shove only will then resign... ...

[autorank]

93. Thanks so much. That Gonzo has certainly got the weasel words...

...but Schumer is the snake charmer. Between the Comey questioning (which is at the "Comey's Evidence of a Crim" link and worth watching) and this, Schumer is #1 with a bullet for effective interrogation. If he'd been Ervins counterpart way back, Nixon would have been gone much quicker (out of fear;)

:hi:

[HCE SuiGeneris]

90. You continue to be one of this country's greatest benefactors.

I applaud all your hard work and innate ability to present your information with clarity and insight. Great job sir! :applause:

P.S. Is it possible/probable that the "dick" orchestrated this meeting?

[autorank]

94. Thank you so much!!!

It's always a great opportunity to delve into the mindlessness and logical convolutions of the *
defenders and operatives. How sorry their task is, how awful their legacy. Whether they defend
the White House across the board or through wedge actions, the apologies for this crew have been
noted and will be remembered. Now that's a story for some one to write. The French got the low
down on the collaborators from a film far too powerful and too late, "The Sorrow and the Pity."

I feel a lot of sorrow for the people but no pity for the perpetrators.

The whole truth of all the betrayals - 9/11, election fraud, the environmental calamity - will
emerge quickly when we reclaim our freedom to operate without hindrance. It will happen.
That makes the wait and struggle well worth it!

Who ever thought this would happen?

[DemReadingDU]

98. Excellent article!

Schumer was great yesterday, I was able to watch most of the hearing thru cspan-3. Fascinating times we are living in. So much corruption and profiteering. Can't wait till these thugs to be gone.

[autorank]

99. "Thugs be gone"

Yes, what a fine day that will be, shooting for a true reformation for the people not the greedy.

How much is enough? They don't know because they never reach their goal, hoarders that they are.

Thank you for you kind words. We will prevail.

[Patsy Stone]

100. Absolutely

Sorry to be so late to the party (and up so late at all). Excellent analysis of that exchange. Schumer was a pit bull, and my new favorite Senator, Sheldon Whitehouse, did a fine, fine job of wondering aloud how the heck Darth got himself inserted into the inner workings of the DoJ. Is there a particular case you can think of that the OVP was interested in, say, for the past few years?

Schumer was asking him about the "there was no dissent about the program" lie, and he wanted to know whether he told the Gang of Eight there was, indeed, dissent. His answer was another series of twists and turns, finally landing on the square labeled something like, "they probably knew because it was obvious that Comey wouldn't sign." Meaning, if the Senators were paying attention, they could have picked up on it. If they didn't, well, that's good enough for Gonzo.

Edited: rodeodance just posted a thread about part of this exchange (but I don't know if it includes the part I mentioned): http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1439282


Let's impeach tomorrow.

:hi:

[autorank]

103. We'll wake up here in the metro area and get right to it

You are never late as long as you show up at some point...

How about that Whitehouse. A RI friend told me that he was very bright. He really wanted to
win for the right reasons, which I think is important, and the guy is smart. There are so many
intellectually indifferent members, it's important to have the smarties front and center.

Thanks for the message. It will be put to good use.

All of a sudden, we're getting some action. Damn, wouldn't want to be a guilty man sitting in
front of Chuck when he was the lead interrogator. I'll check out Whitehouse.

:hi:

[DemReadingDU]

107. I am much impressed with Sen. Whitehouse

He really has some great questions in the hearings that I have listened to. A friend of ours has a daughter who just got hired for Sen. Whitehouse's staff. I told her of my good impressions of Sen. Whitehouse, and that I thought her daughter would gain a lot of valuable experience being on his staff.

P.S. Do u ever sleep?
:hi:

[autorank]

111. :)

I hear the Senator is a gentleman and a first rate intellect. That's a great combination. My daughter worked for Rep. Matsui (who passed away some months ago) as a high school intern. I was
so grateful because his office showed everyone, especially the interns, a great deal of respect.

Someone said sleep is over-rated;) but that person was probably sleep deprived when they said it;)

[Patsy Stone]

110. Here's a clip

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x43223

Enjoy!

[althecat]

101. KnR... from downunder...

What a scorcher!!!!

Excellent indeed. Should be no.1 in greatest soon I'm guessing.

al

[autorank]

102. Bring on the heat...

Here's the metaphor for our current governance -- DC has had no rain for about a month, maybe more
and if the last two months are considered, there have been light showers in the wee hours on two
occasions. We're parched, the temperature is still moderate, room to expand, but there's going to
be some fireworks soon.

The protest at Conyers office, the centrality of a transitory icon to the impeachment debate, the
fraying tempers...are all the enemy of careful analysis.

Oye vey, time to catch up on sleep.

"Scoop" scoops the rational and, in this case, correct approach to IMPEACHMENT.

Mucohs gracias, million grazie grand senor!!!:) !!!

But, on a most fundamental level, these monsters have stretched the limits of every institution in
this country beyond the breaking point.

No more trust in elections.
No more trust in any governmental authority.
Replacement of previous tolerance/restrained trust with reflexive suspicion and in some cases,
hatred of institutions and leaders.
No action on vital national and international interests - environmental catastrophes, health care
for the sick, housing for the homeless, innovation for the creative, opportunities for the
ambitious...

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED for the nihilists who call their philosophy "market solutions" and "globalism."

The old lies and myths are crumbling, idols with feet of clay.

What will replace them?

[althecat]

108. a brave new world?

[cutlassmama]

104. K&R n/t

[aaronbees]

106. K&R

Great, meticulous case your present, autorank. Bravo! Seems like this issue is getting a lot of play, too, so let's hope it actually leads to something!

:toast:

[autorank]

112. Thanks for the video aaronbees! Perfect timing.

You saw the FBI Meuller's testimony - there was a big fued in the administration over warrantless wire tapping...Gonzo said there wasn't. Now it's perjury time for Gonzo but the basis of the story is all there - big fight between Justice and the WH, justice officials ready to resign...heavy duty!

:toast: