IMPEACHMENT VOTE possible TODAY
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8061003087.html

Dennis Kucinich will join me in the first hour.

Most likely the vote will fail to open hearings and instead The House will vote to TABLE (kill or move it to the Judiciary Committee)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8061003087.html

Why do YOU think Democrats don’t support IMPEACHMENT?

I think it’s because Democrats were briefed on torture including waterboarding, black site prison renditions, and warrantless wiretapping of Americans. Democratic Leadership were taken on “virtual tours” of overseas detention sites and shown the harsh techniques interrogators had devised. The full Intelligence Committees were briefed in 2006. Democratic Leadership were also briefed on warrantless wiretapping.

On Iraq: Hardly any members of Congress bothered to read the NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATE before voting for the war.

Who was briefed on torture and rendition black site prisons?

Who was briefed on Warrantless Wiretapping?

WATER BOARDING AND BLACK SITE PRISONS

2002

The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Pelosi and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).

With one known exception, no formal objections were raised by the lawmakers briefed about the harsh methods during the two years in which water boarding was employed, from 2002 to 2003, said Democrats and Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter. The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Pelosi and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).

Individual lawmakers' recollections of the early briefings varied dramatically, but officials present during the meetings described the reaction as mostly quiet acquiescence, if not outright support. "Among those being briefed, there was a pretty full understanding of what the CIA was doing," said Goss, who chaired the House intelligence committee from 1997 to 2004 and then served as CIA director from 2004 to 2006. "And the reaction in the room was not just approval, but encouragement."

2006

In September 2006, the CIA for the first time briefed all members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, producing some heated exchanges with CIA officials, including Director Michael V. Hayden. The CIA director said during a television interview two months ago that he had informed congressional overseers of "all aspects of the detention and interrogation program."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7120801664.html

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.

Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was water boarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archiv...ess_includ.html

Bush delegated much of the day-to-day decision-making and the creation of individual components to then-CIA Director George J. Tenet, according to congressional and intelligence officials who were briefed on the finding at the time. "George could decide, even on killings," one of these officials said, referring to Tenet. "That was pushed down to him. George had the authority on who was going to get it."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5122901585.html

WARRANTLESS WIRETAPPING

Who was briefed?

Rep. Jane Harman (Calif.), ranking Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and former Senate majority leader Thomas A. Daschle (S.D.) said Republicans are trying to create a political issue over Democrats' concern on the constitutional questions raised by the spying program.

At the same time, the Republican chairmen of the Senate and House intelligence committees -- Sen. Pat Roberts (Kan.) and Rep. Peter Hoekstra (Mich.), who attended secret National Security Agency briefings -- said they supported Bush's right to undertake the program without new congressional authorization. They added that Democrats briefed on the program, who included Harman and Daschle, could have taken steps if they believed the program was illegal. All four appeared on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Roberts said he could not remember Democrats raising questions about the program during briefings that, beginning in 2002, were given to the "Gang of Eight." That group was made up of the House speaker and minority leader, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, and the chairmen and ranking Democrats of the House and Senate intelligence committees.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6021201174.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6011802158.html

IRAQ

WHO BOTHERED TO READ THE NIE before voting for the ‘USE OF FORCE” Resolution?
http://thehill.com/index2.php?option=com_c...=1&id=66882

IF THEY HAD THEY WOULD HAVE SEEN THAT THERE WAS NO CASE FOR WAR – FYI - JOHN MCCAIN DID NOT READ THE NIE

There’s a chart here of who did and did not read the full NIE and how they voted. Many Senators are no longer in the Senate. There is a list here as well.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/few-se...2007-06-19.html

Here you will find declassified State Department Intelligence Research (INR) findings that clearly dispute the NIE. These findings were in the NIE.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...ess=389x3358366

THAT IS WHY DEMOCRATS DO NOT IMPEACH. THAT IS WHY REPUBLICANS DON’T IMPEACH.

CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP ARE ACCOMPLICES AND THEY ARE PROTECTING THEMSELVES. SOME MEMBERS ARE PROTECTING THEM AS WELL.

Read the response from Democrat Pelosi and Republican Boehner both speaking through their “surrogates”
http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/....xml&coll=2

What happens when a Democrat breaks ranks or becomes a REFORMER unfriendly to Corporate Interests? There’s always another candidate who can be funded to run against you!

Corporate BLUEWASHING is when a Democrat becomes unfriendly to Corporate Interests in a BLUE district suddenly there’s a well funded Democratic Opponent
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/06/10/9540/

Example Chellie Pengree in Maine
http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080611...4fH3h1OrZo__8QF

ECONOMY

GAS PRICES - SEE?

Regulate oil speculators and the price of oil will fall
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/v-print/story/40360.html

Unemployment

Paralyzed Congress may have to bury Unemployment Benefits in a WAR SPENDING bill
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/gop-me...2008-06-10.html

Health Care

How to LOWER your cost by 81 Billion
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article...ION02/806110326

THE ELECTION - OBAMA V MCCAIN

Obama’s base provides him with 153 electoral votes

McCains base provides him with 116 electoral votes

Check out the Leaning States and Toss Up States…YES WE CAN IF WE DO THE WORK
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/davidcorn/2008...rt-for-mcc.html

YAY! Dennis is going to be on!

Love the DK, YEA!!!

YAY! No homework!

voting now

Randi's list of Reps briefed on torture is very telling. Thanks for the info and perspective - it explains a lot.

Telling, and victims of a kind of shock and awe psychology too? What I don't understand why they not only approved, but some encouraged the torture.



Reminds me of the media's recollections recently of how or why they did not question buildup to war, oh my.

Randi, the Enron loophole has already been closed. The veto was overriden.

Dennis Kucinich THANK YOU, THANK YOU.... KEEP UP THE FIGHT!!!!!!!!! WE ARE WITH YOU ALL THE WAY!!!!!!!!

And CALL your Representative and tell them you DEMAND they support HR 1258. Do it in a polite way but make sure they know you're serious about this and that they should be as well!

Does anyone think as I do that HOMELAND SECURITY IS HACKING THE SITES AND SHUTTING DOWN CONGRESS AS A DEFENSE!

Then they blame it on the Chinese!

They have far too much computer power.


Get them to end Talon would you? "Talon" is the name of their computer tracking system.

GOOGLE IT AND SEE.

The executive branch is blocking the Congress by crashing their computers.

That's what I am trying to say.

Another quick note: Everyone in the world should download and protect a copy of these articles.
They can't end it if it's all over the net.

This is disgraceful. (Not Randi, our Dem Reps who are complicit)

Something needs to be done about this NOW.

Why do I think the Democrats won't impeach this guy?

I think it is because they realize they're up against an organized crime mob who are sitting on the other side of the aisle as well as in many branches of government. In other words, they're almost check mated.

They are certainly complicit too. What else can you surmise? They're either absolute cowards or criminals themselves.

Either they stand and deliver on the defense of our Constitution or we need to remove each and every one of them who won't protect and defend our Constitution!

It's an election year. Let's elect a new clean congress! On both sides of the aisle. I invite both parties to do so. WE ARE ALL AMERICANS.

Already done. I copied www.35articles.com into a PDF which I also made available online.

[size="7"][/size]Good Point!!!!! I also contacted Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to demand that they fulfill their Constitutional obligation to uphold the law....

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080611/tec_hacking_utilities.html

Look at the story above. The hackers are ringing bells all across America. "They" (our most trusted government) tell us it's the Chinese but it's someone who has access to the entire infrastructure. There is only one program that can do this. The supercomputers in the basement of the White House. They have been working on this underground takeover of our internet as a coup de grace on the American people

They are making ready to shut down our internet. To take us over to call Marshall law and to wreck havoc on the coming election by destroying our mode of communication: the internet.

Nobody should have this much power over the people. But they have it and they are making ready to use it. BUMP UP YOUR PERSONAL SECURITY SYSTEM on your computers and don't use the one that your provider company supplies for free. Go out on the web and buy your own and put at least two on your computer. I use 5 and they are inter related to recognize one another. It works like a combination lock.

It's not people from China. It's our own rogue government. Believe it or we're done... cooked.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/...crat-files.html

82 percent of USA TODAY READERS want impeachment.

I am willing to bet it is a clear balance of both Democratic and Republican voters.

Even with Kucinich's 35 articles of Impeachment (I think there are more), I have some questions:

1. How can we get a new Speaker of the House?

-- She should be raising the alarm to the country, but she appears to be caught up in the Hill Bubble.

2. How can we keep the "Chickenhawk Chucklenutz" (Thanks Mike Maloy), his agents and subordinates, together with the Vice President from fleeing the United States?

--- Maybe they have mis-placed confidence?... They avoided Vietnam war, maybe these cocky Chickenhawk believe they can avoid impeachment or criminal convictions. In the fog of my memory when I listened to Whip Beau, This was all part of their master race plan.

3. If Impeachment was passed, would his pardon powers be revoked for his agents and subordinates, together with the Vice President?


4. Lastly, what are WE going to do to keep this from happening AGAIN?

-- I like Randi's idea about all elected reps, senators and the vice president should be automatically under oath anytime in front or around the US Seal, but extended to and not limited to, "Any time the President speaks, along with his agents and subordinates, and the Vice President are ALWAYS considered under oath?

Everywhere I go, I now ask people this question, "Do you know what is happening in Congress?" They look at me puzzled and say, NO. I tell them that our President is going to be IMPEACHED! They look at me puzzled. To the last girl I replied, "Well, I'm sure what Britney does next is more important." OMG...... NO ONE OUT THERE KNOWS OR HAS A CLUE! I am lucky if the person behind the counter knows English. We are done. America is for sale. Sheeple for sale. Just wait, we will have toll roads where the monies will go to foreign companies. Our ports, to the middle east, WHO WILL CARE........ NO BODY! Bring our soldiers home, there is nothing left to fight for. The Constitution is yesterdays news.

I would look at you crazy as well. Mainly because you seem to be bothering total strangers rather rudely and second because your facts are wrong in that the president isn't being impeached at the moment.

There is an argument as to what mitigating damages on behalf of the American Public means really. If phone bills increase due to violations of the law by good samaritans, is the public served ? Would it be better to sue the government ? Were they really good samaritans being that they were paid for their services ? How did carriers protect themselves from liabliities ? Bottom-line to me is effectiveness of the program and exagerated necessities. If these were vital tools, then where are the results ? How accurate was the percieved threat ?

Problem solving goes back as far as the Bush/Cheney Transition Team headed by Rove. Parties adviced the Team that if a service type industry standard were to be set-up then there would need to be legislative changes prior to inception of programs. That way a foreign intel service could provide intel to domestic agencies as a service to them from one OGA to another.

I don't buy the rhetoric that programs started post 09/11, some people claim they can do whatever the hell they want to do. Then there are common excuses like executive priveledge or clear and present danger. So like if you think about it, putting the cart before the horse contaminates cases when it comes to prosecution time. And the is exactly what the FBI told them concerning numerous issues including torture. If an illegal wiretap is used to gain information for prosecution might as well not even prosecute. Have to figure in the one-percent threat doctrine here to see the pressure to catch bad guys after-all the rhetoric was that there were "Hundreds of terrorist cells sleeping in America".

Alot of people could be prosecuted for putting the cart before the horse. I bet federal agents can hardly afford personal liability insurance. But, some people tried to get away for blaming FISA for problems of their own making. FISA just needed to be upgraded for the virtual age and there was no need to remove a check on law enforcement to demonstrate probable cause to an authority. The other thing is the if a foreign intel outfit gets caught running an OP on United States Soil the penalty is 99 years for spying on United States citizens. Besides the authority to investigate terrorism on United States soil is given to FBI not any other OGA including the Pentagon.

Two or three wrongs trying to make a right shows cover-up. The crime never gets them, it's the cover-up. So to ask for retroactive immunity after facts which go back to a period of time prior to Bush occupying the Whitehouse means the lawyers are shooting from the hip. And that ignorance of the Law is never an excuse especially when they were advised to seek legislative changes up front before experimenting with a Corporate Service Industry style of Executive Branch. I look at Congress as the Board of Directors which has failed to protect the stockholders, We the People, to date. I think litigation will go to the Supreme Court one day in the meanwhile liability avoidance models just combine liabilities for the American public. A breach occured in the Levee sometime ago and when the levee breaks where will they stay, Dubai, UAE, South America ?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...toryId=17122659
Graham: Senate Panel Had No Word of Tapes : NPR

I can't find the audio...
Senator Graham sought the Presidential bid in '04 over all this mess. Remember that Goss lied to support GB. IIRC there was an uproar over him being hired because of his bad reputation.

make sure it's at fas.org

http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2008/06/se...tee_issues.html
Senate Committee Issues Reports on Pre-War Iraq Intel » Secrecy News

This report was issued June 5.

You could be right. After all, the PNAC Neocons asserted that they wanted to "dominate in all realms" which certainly included dominance in cyberspace.

RIGHT!!!

Spying started well before 9/11

Posted by Evan Derkacz at 7:57 AM on July 3, 2006.


Bloomberg News reported, on the Friday before a four day weekend, that Bush administration NSA spying plans began well before 9/11.


"The U.S. National Security Agency asked AT&T Inc. to help it set up a domestic call monitoring site seven months before the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, lawyers claimed June 23 in court papers filed in New York federal court."

(snip)

http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/38457/?type=blog

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...zJE&refer=#

Qwest CEO Not Alone in Alleging NSA Started Domestic Phone Record Program 7 Months Before 9/11

By Ryan Singel October 12, 2007 | 5:23:55 PMCategories: NSA, Surveillance

Startling statements from former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio's defense documents alleging the National Security Agency began building a massive call records database seven months before 9/11 aren't the only accusations that the controversial program predated the attacks of 9/11.

According to court documents unveiled this week, former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio clearly wanted to argue in court that the NSA retaliated against his company after he turned down a NSA request on February 27, 2001 that he thought was illegal. Nacchio's attorney issued a carefully worded statement in 2006, saying that Nacchio had turned down the NSA's repeated requests for customer call records. The statement says that Nacchio was asked for the records in the fall of 2001, but doesn't say he was "first asked" then.

And in May 2006, a lawsuit filed against Verizon for allegedly turning over call records to the NSA alleged that AT&T began building a spying facility for the NSA just days after President Bush was inaugurated. That lawsuit is one of 50 that were consolidated and moved to a San Francisco federal district court, where the suits sit in limbo waiting for the 9th Circuit Appeals court to decide whether the suits can proceed without endangering national security.

(snip)

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/10/q...-ceo-not-a.html