Mr. Chairman, surely you remember the Nixon Administration’s illegal efforts to
discredit war critic Daniel Ellsberg:

“…The Nixon administration also began a campaign to discredit Ellsberg. Nixon's plumbers broke into the office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist, Lewis Fielding, in an attempt to find damaging information. When they failed to find Ellsberg's file, they made plans to break into Fielding's home…”

Now the administration, many members of whom “listened and learned” from the Nixonian criminals, have been free to take all that experience and put it to good use to go after any political opponents of the bushies. Raw story
reports that there have been a string of “break-ins and arson” involving people involved in three federal cases related to the US Attorney scandal:

“…In two states where US attorneys are already under fire for serious allegations of political prosecutions, seven people associated with three federal cases have experienced 10 suspicious incidents including break-ins and arson…”

“…These crimes raise serious questions about possible use of deliberate intimidation tactics not only because of who the victims are and the already wide criticism of the prosecutions to begin with, but also because of the suspicious nature of each incident individually as well as the pattern collectively. Typically burglars do not break-into an office or private residence only to rummage through documents, for example, as is the case with most of the burglaries in these two federal cases…”

IMHO, Mr. Chairman, if President Nixon, and other members of his administration had been impeached and convicted, these type of crimes wouldn’t be plaguing the political opponents of this current administration. As I’ve said before, when criminals—especially the leaders of this nation--know they can get away with crimes, there is nothing to prevent them from doing the crime.

Now, the Vice President is telling you that you “can’t investigate” him? Apparently, as we well know, he hasn’t read the Constitution and/or, refuses to be bound by it.

But you sir, you have read the Constitution, you have sworn to uphold it. Mr. Chairman, it is time for “good men to come to the aid of their Country and it’s Constitution”. Sir, it is time for you to have courage, demonstrate leadership, and stop the crimes and protect the citizens from persecution and being preyed upon by the lawbreaking members of the Executive Branch.

Sir, don't you understand that in the current atmosphere of unpunished corruption, and lawbreaking by our elected officials that Congress has allowed to flourish--don't you understand that there is a "trickle down" that allows all those who are in power positions to overreach their boundaries, to make up the rules as they go, and to not fear punishment or accountability?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U90sICeA9nM

The credible answers that we seek in the face of Sean Bell's tragic death may not be easy to find,...

I call bu**sh** on that. The answer has been staring us in the face for quite a while now. It is the assumption of good faith in a police officer. You know what happens when you assume? Of course you do. And now, because of habit, motivated by fear, You fail to even notice the fig leaf.

Lets boil it down to one easily chewed morsel. All a cop has to do to get away with murder, or any lessor crime, is to lay out a cock and bull story. The story carries for one reason alone. The perp is wearing a badge. Without the badge, the story would be called a lie. But, as is explained in the book I sent you, from Seattle Police Chief Doctor Norman Stamper : Breaking Rank : there are two kinds of people. There are Cops. And there are liars.

I am one of the liars.

Take a look at My Criminal Record and it is plain that I am a very well behaved individual, particularly in light of everything. But, nonetheless, the police can suddenly lay hands on me, drag me off, and torture me to be brink of death without ever having to so much as explain why, even just why they took me to jail, to anyone.

Of course I can complain. But to whom? Of course, to the police, who are strongly motivated to NOT get to the bottom of things. And of course to the USDOJ, which apparently DOES NOT REVIEW SUCH COMPLAINTS. Much less investigate them...

And you wonder why this stuff keeps on happening as if no one were attempting to stop it. You, of all people, wonder why. And not content with that, you ask why. I have no idea why you of all people would ask this of all questions, for you are the poster boy.

Impeachment is off the table
Frosted Flake

Postscript. I am aware that "Boy" carries very heavy negative connotations when the word is applied to a black man by a white. I did not intend and do not believe I used the word in that manner. "Poster boy" is a phrase in common use. It refers to an emblematic individual.

Double Postscript ; There remains a shoe to drop. A court order which I failed to comply with. Do they normally get printed on red paper? This should be probable cause to open this can of worms. The ten year anniversary is coming around in August.

So now that they are not a 501c3, they can comment.

I thought the comment was pretty good. Here is a taste :

Without widespread recognition of the moral mission of government, we will continue to engage in skewed debates over false choices, such as whether to mandate the purchase of private insurance that does not guarantee care.

Worth a look.
Frosted Flake

We've already got it ! ! ! STUPID!
It's being given to us in our AIR ! ! !

AEROSOL OPERATION
CRIMES & COVER-UP

It's in our water! ! !

WATER POLLUTION

It's in our food ! ! !

GENETIC ENGINEERING

What's the big deal about Universal Health Care, When all these great folks are making sure that we live a healthy lifestyle?

As for the tragedy with Sean Bell,This sad case is multi-causal,one of which is the total disregard of law coming from the majority of our elected leaders. This disregard is flowing directly down hill ,straight to we the people. We are the ones who are receiving the brunt of this lawlessness.How is it even possible that you ,being at the top of the chain,cannot see the injustice that YOU are condoning?

P S: Hang in there Frosty. Here's a chunck of that Asburn you asked for a few pager back !(<:

Mr. Chairman, the Sean Bell tragedy is part of a larger problem—that of those charged with enforcing the law being the people that are breaking the law. If you do not get to the root of the problem, you will not solve the problem. The lawbreaking, as you well know, goes to the top.

Mr. Chairman, some of the Specific incidences of “suspicious criminal activity” against targets of DoJ Investigations, as related by Raw Story investigative reporters: that warrant the House Judiciary Committee’s Investigation:

- “In Alabama, for instance, the home of former Democratic Governor Don Siegelman was burglarized twice during the period of his first indictment. Nothing of value was taken, however, and according to the Siegelman family, the only items of interest to the burglars were the files in Siegelman's home office.

- “In…Missippi… the main target of the indictment attorney Paul Minor, had his office broken into…”

- “…Mississippi Supreme Court Justice, Oliver E. Diaz Jr., had his home burglarized. According…nothing of value was taken and the burglars only rummaged through documents and in Minor’s case, also took a single computer from an office full of expensive office equipment.”

- “…Mississippi…former Judge John Whitfield was the victim of arson at his office….

- “In Alabama…Don Siegelman…whistleblower…Dana Jill Simpson, had her home burned down, and shortly thereafter her car was allegedly forced off the road…”

“...While there is no direct evidence linking these crimes to the US Attorneys’ office targeting these individuals, or to the Bush administration, there is a distinct pattern that makes it highly unlikely that these incidents are isolated and unrelated.”

“All of these crimes remain unsolved….”

They remain “unsolved”?? Mr. Chairman, has the Judiciary Committee questioned why “investigators” aren't solving these cases? Because of the relationships of the victims to the DoJ cases, and because the possibility of their victimization being mere coincidence would seem to stretch credibility--don't you believe that these cases warrant review by the Judiciary Committee? Why aren’t you investigating what has the appearances of a possible abuse of power and lawbreaking. Cui bono? Who profits if whistleblowers are victimized?

This criminal activity is possibly of a scope that dwarfs Watergate, and that was enough to justifiably bring down a criminal Administration. Yet, while you sit on the sidelines and watch this possible persecution of witnesses against the Administration. If those charged with enforcing the law, from the top down aren't transparent in their activities and aren't held accountable, the trickle down atmosphere of tolerance of lawlessness by law enforcement leads to incidents like the Sean Bell tragedy.

While Congress continues to shirk its oversight responsibility, the Bush Administration continues on its destructive course. Raw Story reports The Pentagon is drawing up plans for a "surgical strike" against an alleged insurgent training camp in Iran according to the UK Sunday Times’ Michael Smith: (emphasis mine)

“…The US military is drawing up plans for a “surgical strike” against an insurgent training camp inside Iran if Republican Guards continue with attempts to destabilise Iraq, western intelligence sources said last week…”

“…If the situation in Basra goes back to what it was like before, America is likely to blame Iran and carry out a surgical strike on a militant training camp across the border in Khuzestan...”

“…They acknowledged Iran was unlikely to cease involvement in Iraq and that, however limited a US attack might be, the fighting could escalate.”

“…British officials believe the US military tends to overestimate the effect of the Iranian involvement in Iraq…”

Surprising how long things take sometimes.

Pakistan coalition averts collapse with deal to restore ousted judges

3 May 2008

Pakistan's fledgling civilian government appeared last night to have found a way out of the crisis threatening to pull it apart when it announced that the nation's ousted judges would be restored this month.

The former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, whose Pakistan Muslim League-N (PML-N) is the junior coalition party, said 12 May had been set as the date for the reinstatement of the 60 judges – including the ousted chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry – who were kicked out by President Pervez Musharraf last year.

"I want to inform the entire nation that on Monday, 12 May 2008, all deposed judges will be restored," said Mr Sharif. "We are in strong favour of keeping this coalition for the sake of the country and we understand we should keep it at all costs. Its break-up would rejuvenate dictatorship."

The difference is oversight. Parenthetically, Oversight does not mean standing there watching. It means controlling. As in the following story.

Lessee, March, April, May...And NOW we see the story. Is someone embarrassed?

Wallace and Woodfox had spent their days in separate cells, conversing with others through cracks in walls. After being placed in isolation almost immediately after the murder, they were allowed about an hour a day in the yard when other prisoners were inside. Two months ago, prison authorities released them into a dormitory with other maximum-security inmates. Officials did not explain why.

The move came less than a week after the head of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), traveled to Angola to meet with the men. He released a statement expressing concern that they may be innocent, and noted that they had been in isolation for "possibly a longer period than any other inmate in U.S. history."

Two years ago, a state judicial commissioner recommended that Wallace's conviction be reversed on grounds that Louisiana withheld evidence favorable to him, giving his lawyers hope that the 66-year-old inmate would be freed. The case is before a state appeals court.

Woodfox faces far tougher hurdles. His murder conviction was overturned a decade ago. But he was retried and convicted in 1998, based again on Brown's earlier (Apparently Perjured : FF) testimony, which was read into the record because Brown had died. Woodfox's attorneys are asking a federal court to reexamine his case.

Armed Robbery convictions, way back in the (Cough) Sixties. Should have been released, a loong long time ago. But some folks don't want that. And have ways of getting thier way. Again we have the credible answers that we seek in the face of Sean Bell's tragic death; answers which some folks cannot see.

Duty is not prerogative, it is duty. It is understandable that those with their hands on the controls may decide to manipulate the controls to satisfy themselves. This is why the phrase "You're Fired" was invented.

But we don't get to fire those who abuse us, Do We?

And sometimes we don't even get to survive them.
Frosted Flake

To
Attorney General Michael Mukasey
Justice Department
950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530

Request for and Report in Support of Appointment of Outside Special
Counsel to Investigate the Bush Administration’s Statements that Iraq Had
Sought Uranium for a Nuclear Weapon, which Violated the Criminal Statutes
18 U.S.C. § 1001 and 18 U.S.C. § 371 that Prohibit Making False and
Fraudulent Statements to Congress and Obstructing It’s Functions

...

Considering the strong case presented herein, the Department’s refusal to appoint an
outside Special Counsel would reveal that the Department still engages in selective prosecution.

Submitted by
Francis T. Mandanici
Attorney At Law

But then, we're still waiting a follow-up to this request...

March 17, 2003

The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

I am writing regarding a matter of grave concern. Upon your order, our armed forces will soon initiate the first preemptive war in our nation’s history. The most persuasive justification for this war is that we must act to prevent Iraq from developing nuclear weapons.

...

Plainly, more explanation is needed. I urge you to provide to me and to the relevant committees of Congress a full accounting of what you knew about the reliability of the evidence linking Iraq to uranium in Africa, when you knew this, and why you and senior officials in the Administration presented the evidence to the U.N. Security Council, the Congress, and the American people without disclosing the doubts of the CIA. In particular, I urge you to address:

1. Whether CIA officials communicated their doubts about the credibility of the forged evidence to other Administration officials, including officials in the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the National Security Council, and the White House;

2. Whether the CIA had any input into the “Fact Sheet” distributed by the State Department on December 19, 2002; and

3. Whether the CIA reviewed your statement in the State of the Union address regarding Iraq’s attempts to obtain uranium from Africa and, if so, what the CIA said about the statement.

Given the urgency of the situation, I would appreciate an expeditious response to these questions.

Sincerely,
Henry A. Waxman
Ranking Minority Member

tic-tock... tic-tock...
running out the clock...
how many more must die...
so that you, John Conyers...
don't have to prosecute
a sitting president's LIE?

==============
I M P E A C H
WAR CRIMINALS!!

Bloch shut down Siegelman investigation?

I suggest that Karl Rove and Noel Hillman not stray too far from home in the near future. For whatever reason - either because Bush wants to leave office with at least one scandal resolved or what - But Mukasey's DOJ/FBI may actually be doing their job on this one:

"WASHINGTON (AP) ? The U.S. Office of Special Counsel last year shut down a previously undisclosed investigation into the federal prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, according to an internal memo made public Wednesday.

The investigation was being conducted by a task force formed at the agency a year ago to pursue high-profile political investigations in Washington, most notably whether the White House played politics in firing U.S. attorneys. It began gathering information on the Siegelman case in September and was planning to request documents from the Justice Department in October before Special Counsel Scott Bloch ordered the case closed, according to the Jan. 18 draft memo, made public by the Project on Government Oversight, a watchdog group.

The investigation was one of many that the task force had taken up, and the memo shows that Bloch frequently differed with investigators about which cases to pursue.

An attorney for Bloch, who himself is under a federal investigation, declined comment. But a person familiar with the origins of the POGO draft document said the decision to not pursue Siegelman or other cases stemmed mostly from a shortage of time and resources. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.

Siegelman, a Democrat, said the memo suggests further political interference in his case and reiterated his call for the Justice Department to appoint a special prosecutor to take up the matter.

"The question is who told them to shut it down," Siegelman said Wednesday when told of the memo. "Why would you start an investigation and let it proceed and then shut it down? The logical conclusion is that somebody intervened and told them to shut down the investigation."

Siegelman has long claimed that Republicans engineered his prosecution on bribery and other corruption charges to kill his chances for re-election, a claim repeatedly denied by federal prosecutors. His attorneys requested earlier this year that the Justice Department appoint a special prosecutor to investigate whether White House appointees in Washington, including former Bush adviser Karl Rove, influenced the case. Rove also has denied any involvement.

The Special Counsel's office is an independent agency charged with investigating unlawful political activity by government employees and ensuring that government whistle-blowers are not subjected to reprisals."

Who would have the authority to tell Bloch to shut down the investigation? Guesses? You only get one. One more point, what are the odds that Bloch is being thrown on his sword to stop the bleeding upward in the chain of command? Okay, I think it time me and Scott Horton won the Pulitzer for our reporting on this case.

Posted by Larisa Alexandrovna on May 07, 2008 at 09:54 PM

click here

interview here

--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
You can lead a republican to the truth, but you can't make him think it...

An individual is complicit in a crime if they are aware of its occurrence, have the ability to report the crime, but fail to do so. As such the individual effectively allows the criminals to carry out a crime despite easily being able to stop them, either directly or by contacting the authorities thus making them a de-facto accessory to the crime rather than innocent bystanders.

Complicit

"Dont bitch, Buy bullets!"