|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
 Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:32 pm
|
 |
|
Is Bush Facing Arrest?
http://www.themedianews.com/DAGGER/Front%20Page/middle00.htm
Foreign invaders most always come to ruin. Napoleon found that out the hard way. In the worst winter up to then, the route of retreat from Moscow was littered with six hundred thousand French corpses, some not thawing out for months. (Another historic terrible winter helped crush Hitler's army at Stalingrad.)
A small group of U.S. Admirals and Generals, called "flag officers", vowed to arrest their Commander-in-Chief Bill Clinton, for treason as authorized by the Uniform Military Code. If arrested for mutiny, and not immediately assassinated, they were prepared to defend themselves with proof of his treachery, meeting with the head of the Red Chinese Secret Police, Wang Jun, in the White House, and selling and conveying U.S. MILITARY, industrial, and financial secrets to the Red Chinese, sworn enemies of the U.S.
As detailed elsewhere, ten U.S. Military brass were murdered and the patriotic effort doomed. Click for documents
Now, a much larger group in the U.S. Military has been apparently planning as well, to arrest or otherwise block or seize their current Commander-in-Chief, George W. Bush. Among the charges they are prepared to prove against whom some call "Bushfraud":
[1] That as arranged by his father and others, all with prior knowledge of 9-11, Bush went along with high-level treachery, orchestrated within the U.S. government, and with a faction in the Aristocracy, and within the U.S. and British Financial Establishment, and with connivance of big-timers on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, murdering three thousand persons on U.S. soil and falsely blaming the deed on patsies, "The Arabs".
[2] Causing great bloodshed to both Americans and Iraqis, George W. Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, without a Declaration of War, and falsely contending the Baghdad regime was threatening the U.S. by preparing to use Weapons of Mass Destruction.
As a stooge and scapegoat for a crazed faction within the Aristocracy and the U.S. Bureaucracy, and instigated and promoted by Queen Elizabeth II, jointly in a massive account with the Bush Crime Family and funds of the Saddam Hussein partnership, in the British Monarch's private enterprise, Coutts Bank London Click; and as supervised by Daddy Bush and on behalf of Daddy, Bush, Jr., set about, for the second time in twelve years, to start up with his father's disgruntled former private business partner Saddam Hussein, the oily, sneaky creation of the Secret Political Police, the American CIA. All for the purpose of stealing Iraq's treasures, such as oil.
[3] Called by some by his middle initial, Dubya aranged to heavily bribe the iraqi military elite in advance of the invasion, and had them and their families safely removed to the U.S., to go along with and assist the treasonous scheme. All the while, a U.S. Military cargo plane whisked Saddam out of Iraq, parking him at a U.S. jurisdiction site. Click
[4] That because of knowledge of George W. Bush's past and current sordid relationship with his long-time male sex-mate, the Red Chinese Secret Police have been enabled to blackmail out of the Bush White House, U.S. MILITARY, industrial, and financial secrets.
And the oil-soaked, spy-riddled American monopoly press, with full knowledge of all this, have censored the same.
Will this situation proceed as a clandestine matter, or become dramatic, perhaps violent? Stay tuned. |
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Thu Oct 02, 2003 6:59 pm
|
|
|
White House Gives No Ground in Case of CIA Leak.
By Caren Bohan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House on Thursday gave no ground on Democratic calls for a special counsel to investigate the leak of a CIA agent's identity, despite a poll showing most Americans want such an independent probe.
The controversy surrounds allegations that someone in the White House blew the cover of CIA operative Valerie Plame in retaliation for her husband's criticism of the way intelligence was handled in the run-up to the Iraq war.
According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll, nearly seven in 10 Americans favored the appointment of a special counsel in the case that is now being investigated by the Justice Department.
Asked about such support for an independent probe, White House spokesman Scott McClellan maintained that the Justice Department was capable of handling the investigation.
"The Department of Justice is the one who makes those decisions. The Department of Justice has publicly said that all legal options remain on the table," McClellan said.
"Keep in mind that the Justice Department, the career professionals who are overseeing the investigation, want to get to the bottom of this," he added.
Galvanized by the poll numbers in support of a special counsel, Democrats pressed the issue.
"I don't think we should take that first no for an answer," said U.S. House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat.
Under regulations adopted in 1999, a special counsel can be appointed by the attorney general when the investigation or prosecution would present a conflict of interest for the Justice Department or when it would be in the "public interest" because "extraordinary circumstances exist."
Justice Department spokesman Mark Corallo has declined to rule out the possible appointment of a special counsel in the future. "We are not closing any doors," he said. "No legal options are closed."
A CONFLICT OF INTEREST?
A Senate Republican aide said he did not now expect any Republican on Capitol Hill to join Democrats in the call for a special counsel.
"I believe, out of a sense of loyalty, Republicans will stand with the White House for now," the aide said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. "Besides, I don't think the political pressure has reached that point yet."
Still, the aide said he expected Attorney General John Ashcroft to soon recuse himself from the case, turning it over to a deputy because of the "perceived conflict of interest" based on his ties with White House political adviser Karl Rove.
On Monday, McClellan denied that Rove, top political adviser to President Bush, was behind the disclosure to reporters of the undercover agent's name. Revealing classified information is a federal crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
The New York Times reported on Thursday that Rove was a paid consultant to three of Ashcroft's political campaigns in Missouri.
Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York said he would urge Ashcroft to recuse himself from the CIA case.
"It's a mystery as to why Ashcroft hasn't yet removed himself from (the) investigation," Schumer said in a statement.
The Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 81 percent of Americans viewed the CIA matter as serious, and 72 percent thought it was likely a White House official was behind the leak.
Plame's identity was disclosed by columnist Robert Novak a week after her husband, Joseph Wilson, wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times accusing Bush of exaggerating the Iraq weapons threat.
Wilson, a former diplomat sent by the Bush administration on a mission to Niger in February 2002, questioned Bush's claim in his State of the Union speech last January that Iraq sought uranium for a nuclear weapons program from Africa. |
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Thu Oct 02, 2003 8:31 pm
|
|
|
Mech, I bow before you! You are an amazing investigative cut and paster! LOL! No really!
Your arguments are great, your articles speak volumes and here's another to add to your thread of impeachment as many turn to the light! All of you who continue to believe in this administration are blinded fools -- I'm sorry! You are my brothers and sisters, but indeed you reject the truth of the matter, even on the most obvious levels.
Clinton - impeachment on personal indescretions
G.W.Bush -- impeachment on treason, Constitutional trashing, murder, lying to the people, and flagrant ignoring of international signed treaties ....
Hmmm, which one is more deserving of impeachment? Gee, I wonder!
And as far as Ritter, he's ruined his reputation in a personal way, but how do we know this is true? Could be Rove's spreading of lies, too. William Rivers Pitt is the bulldog writer who wrote with Ritter about Iraq and that all of you sleeping sheep need to read. Find him at http://www.truthout.com
God help us all to have no fear in the quest for the truth. Please help us open to facts and realize that those in power who do not reflect the integrity and respect of our laws and freedoms need to find work elsewhere. Help us to see the truth!
Peace,
BC
Soros calls for 'regime change' in US
Soros's Foundations Network works throughout the world
Billionaire philanthropist George Soros has called for an end to the Bush administration ahead of next year's presidential elections.
Mr Soros - whose Foundations Network has given $1bn around the world to various causes to help tackle poverty and disease - told BBC Radio 4's United Nations Or Not? programme that the US would only stop pursuing "extremist" policies if there was a change at the White House.
"It is only possible if you have a regime change in the United States - in other words if President Bush is voted out of power.
"I am very hopeful that people will wake up and realise that they have been led down the garden path, that actually 11 September has been hijacked by a bunch of extremists to put into effect policies that they were advocating before such as the invasion of Iraq."
Imposing power
Mr Soros added that there was a "false ideology" behind the policies of the Bush administration.
The US is now discovering that it is extremely painful and certainly costly to go it alone
George Soros
"There is a group of - I would call them extremists - who have the following belief: that international relations are relations of power, not of law, that international law will always follow what power has achieved," he said.
"And therefore [they believe] the United States being the most powerful nation on earth should impose its power, impose its will and its interests on the world and it should do it looking after itself.
"I think this is a very dangerous ideology. It is very dangerous because America is in fact very powerful."
He added that he felt US actions in the build-up to the war on Iraq was evidence of an extremist element in the Bush administration.
"Probably President Chirac would not disagree with this philosophy but he is not so powerful - so I am not so worried about what France is doing," Mr Soros said, referring to France's opposition to the war.
"But America being really the dominant power to be in the grips of such an extremist ideology is very dangerous for the world and that is my major concern."
However, he added that he felt the rift between the US and the United Nations over the war - which President Bush referred to as a "difficult and defining moment" for the UN - had in fact strengthened the UN, rather than weakened it.
"I think that the United States has over-reached," he said.
"What happens to extremists is that they go to extremes and the falsehood in their ideology becomes apparent.
"In a democracy the electorate - which is not extremist - will punish them and they know it, so they have to retreat.
"I think there is a good chance that the US will yet turn to a greater extent to the United Nations because they are now discovering that it is extremely painful and certainly costly to go it alone so in the end the outcome may be to strengthen the United Nations."
State interests
Mr Soros was, however, critical of the UN for what it sees as its inability to function well as a collective of states.
Soros only once gave money to the UN - in Bosnia
"The United Nations is not an organisation that is terribly effective in promoting open society because it is an association of states... states always put their national interests ahead of the common interest.
"So it is not a very effective organisation for changing conditions inside states."
Mr Soros has a history of donating great sums of money to areas in need around the world - but only once has he done this through the UN.
"In Bosnia we gave it to UNHCR - but that was really quite the exception.
"We do interfere in the internal affairs of states, but based on supporting people inside the country who take a certain stance.
"We have actually been quite effective in bringing about democratisation, democratic regime change in Slovakia, Croatia and Yugoslavia, but that's by helping civil society in those countries to mobilise."
Positive response
Mr Soros is highly critical of much government bureaucracy, preferring to make his donations directly to those in need as much as possible.
In June this year he announced he would be drastically cutting back the money he gave to Russia.
And he said that money his fund was pledging to the fight against HIV/Aids would be "more effective" because it was going "only through a governmental organisation."
He conceded too that President Bush's policies on the HIV/Aids pandemic were positive.
"There is some response in America, in the Bush administration, to pressure from some of their constituencies - so there is the Millennium Challenge account, the contribution on fighting HIV/Aids," Mr Soros said.
"Those are positive aspects of the Bush administration. I am very supportive of the Millennium Challenge account - this is the new development aid that they are putting in - and I am very supportive and delighted that President Bush is willing to contribute to the global fund on Aids.
"So I am critical on some aspects of the Bush administration but not every aspect - and here I am actually very supportive."
|
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Thu Oct 02, 2003 8:52 pm
|
|
|
Link for Soros article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3201631.stm
Military Families Unhappy with Iraq Deployments
Wed October 1, 2003 04:15 PM ET
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=SQ5JPIK0BB1V0C RBAEZSFEY?type=reutersEdge&storyID=3542520
By Sue Pleming
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Families of some U.S. troops in Iraq, especially those mobilized as military reserves, said on Wednesday they felt betrayed by extended deployments and feared this could weigh heavily on morale in the field.
Relatives are e-mailing Congress to voice frustration, have set up web sites and are writing petitions to demand shorter deployments, a more predictable rotation of troops and fixed homecoming dates.
Families of "weekend warriors" -- Army Reserves and National Guard members more accustomed to devoting a weekend a month and two weeks summer training rather than a year in the desert -- are particularly bitter by extended call-ups.
"There are single parents, business owners, employees and new fathers in our unit. The reserve system is not designed to supplement the military for such an extended period of time," says a petition set up by families of the 129th Combat HET Transportation Company Reserve Unit in Kansas.
The web site for the petition (http://www.129bringthemhome.com) said Army Reserves families were disillusioned by a decision to keep reservists on the ground beyond 12 months.
"Morale is absolutely pathetic," said Rachel Trueblood, whose husband, a staff sergeant, is based in Kuwait. "Some of the guys out there are saying 'Let me get out of here, we are sitting out here doing stupid stuff and risking our lives."
Trueblood said it was unclear when her husband would be home. "We are meant to be the back-up force not the active one," she said.
A spokesman for the Army Reserves acknowledged some troops were "surprised" by how long they would be deployed but he said morale was high and troops wanted to do their duty.
"The policy is clear. It says boots on the ground for one year," he said. "It possibly could have been communicated a little bit better up front. We want everyone to know that when you mobilize you will spend a year in theater and that is probably going to mean 14-16 months."
ABSENCE OF MANY TROOPS FROM OTHER COUNTRIES
In the absence of many troops from other countries, the U.S. military is relying on National Guard and Reserve Troops to bolster its 130,000 troops in Iraq. About 20,000 Reserve and National Guard troops are in Iraq and nearby states.
Military families understand troops must serve during times of war but complain of being told their loved ones are coming home only to then have leave canceled.
"They just shouldn't be jerking these guys around. It's a real morale buster," said Daphne Smith, whose son-in-law is a pilot in Iraq and returned home from Afghanistan only to turn around a few weeks later to go to Iraq.
"We don't want to seem like we are whining, but we are afraid that mistakes will start to happen if morale is low because they are there too long without a break," she said.
Former Desert Storm planner retired Gen. Daniel Christman, who is on standby reserve status himself, said the key to keeping up troop and family morale was predictability.
"Families need to have the basis for personal planning and once that has been announced the military needs to stick to that," said Christman, now with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Employers of military reserves, he said, also needed an accurate timetable to enable them to plan their own staffing. Christman said he feared army recruiting and retention could be affected by the long deployments.
Army officials said they have to date seen no adverse impact on recruiting and retention in the Guard and Army Reserves despite the large numbers of troops deployed.
Rep. John Murtha, the ranking Democrat on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, grilled Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Tuesday about overextended U.S. troops.
Rumsfeld replied nothing was more important to the military than its people and they were working hard to find a balance.
Not to mention Veteran's for Peace.
Rovegate: (just my pet name!)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29560-2003Oct1.html
Many will be in favor of impeachment when all has come out!
BC
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Boomer Chick on 10-02-2003] |
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Thu Oct 02, 2003 9:10 pm
|
|
|
GOP Quotes on Importance of Independent Counsels
quote:
Excerpt:
"Given the obvious conflict of interest, however, it should be an independent counsel,
and not you, who exercises such discretion."
-- Orrin Hatch (R-Kinky Sex) to Janet Reno
quote:
"The preliminary investigation of Gore represents progress, however slight. Appointment of an
independent counsel to investigate both the president and the vice president is inevitable.
The longer her delay in doing this, the longer it will take to get answers the American people deserve."
-- Henry Hyde, with another man's wife sitting on his lap
quote:
"At some point questions must be answered, if only to build confidence that a rigorous investigation
is underway and that Justice isn't merely circling the wagons to defend the White House."
-- Trent Lott (R-Racist Pig)
They KNEW their witchhunt would come back to haunt them, but they hated Clinton so much, they framed him.
Now the shoe's on the other foot and they claim there's "no need" to have serious felony investigated, but when it was
Clinton's sex life, they said that was the most important thing in the world. The GOP pulled FBI agents off the hunt
for Osama to chase Arkansas girls all the way to f@#$% Japan because they HAD to get Clinton.
Thank you, Orrin Hatch, for sending those FBI agents to Akansas.
Thank you, Henry Hyde, for looking for me inside Clinton's zipper.
Thank you, Trent Lott, for keeping America's attention on Monica, not terrorism.
Thank you, Newt Gingrich, for keeping impeaching Clinton while you were banging your secretary.
Thank you, Tom Delay, for the partisan bickering that gave us our chance to attack.
Thank you, Supreme Court, for installing a lazy and stupid president that we could outwit
http://www.bartcop.com/
Seen on the streets of Germany
BC 
|
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Thu Oct 02, 2003 9:18 pm
|
|
|
Cells of Body Politic Disintegrating
Sherman Skolnick, Lenny Bloom
Nixon White House aide John Dean, to no avail, told Tricky Dick, there was a cancer on the presidency. That was the Watergate debacle.
By 2003, the malignancy has spread to Congress, the U.S. Supreme Court, and the White House. Some examples. There is a demand for investigation that Judges of the U.S. Supreme Court and the Chicago Federal Appeals Court have themselves committed a fraud upon their own court. Details of the corruption overlap can be examined.
Some folks still remember how the 5-judge majority on the High Court, in Bush versus Gore, usurping State Law authority, arbitrarily installed George W. Bush as the occupant and resident of the Oval Office. This Military-style Court Junta, so unsure of their ruling, ordered their decision never to be used as a precedent in any other case. Gore was the elected President. He just was not inaugurated. Now there are whispers that three of the dissenting High Court Judges are threatened with physical harm.
And, it is no secret. BOTH houses of Congress are for sale. Sort of a two-for-one cheapo deal by lobbyists. And in some foreign languages, the word "lobbyist" is the same as bribe-carrier or bagman.
The Bush White House is a terminal case, stemming from the looming U.S. Military dishonor disaster, called Iraq. A symptom of a rapidly failing American Imperialism, a U.S. blood disease.
Cynics claim America needs drastic sorts of "medical" remedies. Sort of a latter day geopolitical chemotherapy nationwide treatment. Some would like to label their favorite reformer as a "Doctor", one who treats the U.S. body politic which is riddled with malign termination malady.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Mech on 10-02-2003] |
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Thu Oct 02, 2003 10:39 pm
|
|
|
Actually, the worst behavior of all is the Iraq attack!
1. "two top White House officials" and "Purely and simply for revenge":
BUSH ADMINISTRATION IS FOCUS OF INQUIRY
By Mike Allen and Dana Priest, Washington Post, 9/28/03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11208-2003Sep27.html
2. Leak was published in scores of newspapers in early July:
MISSION TO NIGER
By Robert Novak, multiple papers, 9/14/03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30055-2003Oct1.html
3. Bush has no plans to ask his staff:
BUSH AIDES SAY THEY'LL COOPERATE WITH PROBE INTO INTELLIGENCE LEAK
By Mike Allen, Washington Post, 9/29/03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14909-2003Sep28.html
4. Ashcroft employed Karl Rove; signs of room for a cover-up:
ATTORNEY GENERAL IS CLOSELY LINKED TO INQUIRY FIGURES
By Elisabeth Bumiller and Eric Lichtblau, New York Times, 10/2/03 http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/02/politics/02ASHC.html?hp
5. 7 in 10 Americans want a special prosecutor:
OUTSIDE PROBE OF LEAKS IS FAVORED
By Dana Milbank and Mike Allen, Washington Post, 10/2/03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29560-2003Oct1.html
6. "A single allegation can be most worthy of a special prosecutor":
CNN’s Evans and Novak, 10/4/97
7. Joe Wilson's New York Times editorial:
WHAT I DIDN'T FIND IN AFRICA
By Joseph C. Wilson 4th, New York Times, 7/6/03 http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0706-02.htm
8. "I have nothing but contempt and anger":
REMARKS BY GEORGE BUSH AT THE DEDICATION CEREMONY FOR THE GEORGE BUSH CENTER FOR INTELLIGENCE
26 April 1999 http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/1999/bush_speech_042699.html
 |
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Thu Oct 02, 2003 11:10 pm
|
|
|
OF COURSE they are puuting Ashcroft in charge!
Gee...after all Karl Rove was Ashcrofts campaign manager. |
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:19 pm
|
|
|
Right on, Mech!
Don't you love the cartoon? Two wolves? And notice they're not in sheep's clothing, but in suits, representing what? Corporations with a dash of military (police) accessory. ACCESSORY as in crime?
Skolnik may be a scout and a sniffer and on the paranoid side, but his sniffing and searching is needed in this society. One can read with discernment, as always.
BC
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Boomer Chick on 10-03-2003] |
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:38 pm
|
|
|
http://www.counterpunch.org/goodman10022003.html
The Ties That Blind
The Ashcroft-Rove Connection
By AMY GOODMAN and JEREMY SCAHILL
(and the Staff of Democracy Now!)
There's an old saying that you should never let a fox guard the henhouse. The same could be said of the investigation into the latest White House scandal. Attorney General John Ashcroft is refusing to appoint an independent prosecutor to investigate who in the administration leaked the name of a CIA operative to journalists. This despite the fact that Ashcroft has long-standing ties to one of the main suspects: President Bush's top political advisor Karl Rove.
"I think it's very difficult on its surface for John Ashcroft to be taken seriously as an investigator," said James Moore, author of Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W Bush Presidential/, in an interview with Democracy Now!. "In this case, there is a close relationship between someone who is a high profile suspect and the individual who is leading the investigation of him. And it immediately goes to the question of credibility and validity of that particular investigation."
Rove has been accused of leaking the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame, in retaliation for her husband, veteran diplomat Joseph Wilson, blowing the whistle on the Bush administration's charge that Saddam Hussein attempted to import uranium for nuclear weapons from Niger.
Rove is best known as the driving force behind Bush's taking of the presidency, but he also worked for Ashcroft over the course of two decades.
"It goes all the way back to the mid 1980's when John Ashcroft first ran for governor and then when he ran for the United States Senate against Mel Carnahan," says Moore. "Karl was so intimately involved."
Not only did Rove work for Ashcroft in the 80s, but he was one of the main forces behind Ashcroft's controversial appointment to the job he currently holds, attorney general. Rove lobbied intensely for his former employer's nomination after Ashcroft lost his senate seat to a dead man, the late Mel Carnahan.
While Ashcroft was not Bush's first choice for attorney general, Rove reportedly told Bush that spilling some blood over the nomination of the fiercely right-wing Ashcroft was "a no-lose proposition."
Just as George W. Bush profited handsomely from the building of a stadium for his Texas Rangers baseball team, Karl Rove cashed in from the successful campaign in St. Louis to get a stadium built. The governor who signed the legislation?
John Ashcroft.
Now attorney general, Ashcroft is refusing to hand over the reigns of the criminal investigation of his political ally, former employee and longtime advisor, Karl Rove.
For the past several days, the White House has been besieged with questions on the "burning" of CIA operative Valerie Plame. Scott McClellan, the press secretary and other officials have offered only carefully worded and non-specific responses to reporters' questions as to who leaked the identity of Wilson's wife.
"It is impossible for any of us to believe that this happened without Karl knowing about it," says author James Moore. "When you cross this man in the political arena, he gets even; and he gets even in a way that he doesn't just defeat you, he is compelled to destroy you. He doesn't know how to do a measured response when he is angry, and so he leaks information about people that destroys them."
According to the latest Washington Post-ABC poll, 69% of Americans believe there should be a special counsel independent of the administration investigating the White House leak. Yet, in his only news conference to date on the issue, Ashcroft stood firm that his office will oversee the investigation. "The prosecutors and agents who are and will be handling this investigation are career professionals with extensive experience in handling matters involving sensitive national security information and with experience relating to investigations of unauthorized disclosures of such information."
At the Justice Department news conference, a reporter attempted to question Ashcroft further, "Can you at least say what assurances you can give people that the matter will be handled independently without... "
Ashcroft interrupted, "Are there other questions today?"
Yes there are. But an independent counsel should be asking them.
Democracy Now! is a daily national grassroots radio/tv newshour. Research assistance for this article was provided by producers Mike Burke and Sharif Abdel Kouddous. www.democracynow.org. They can be reached at: jeremy@democracynow.org
|
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:44 pm
|
|
|
In relation to the latest scandal, which could in time be one of the main reasons for impeachment among many, the following news item:
MSNBC'S Buchanan & Press scored a major scoop on Wednesday, all but unmasking the high government official who "outed" a CIA operative via a July 14 column by Robert Novak. Larry Johnson, a former CIA analyst who worked with Valerie Plame, the reported agent, all but identified "Scooter" Libby as the government official who outed her – and at least one other in the Vice President's office.
Who is "Scooter" Libby?
He's the nexus of the neocon network in Washington, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, and assistant to the President, whose office is the operational nerve center of the War Party. It is Libby and Cheney who made repeated trips to the CIA, pressuring them to accept tall tales of Al Qaeda connections and assorted "weapons of mass destruction" supposedly lurking in Baghdad – including the Niger-uranium yellowcake "evidence" that Iraq had acquired fissionable material for a nuclear weapon.
The documents purportly proving the Niger-Iraq uranium connection turned out to be a crude forgery.
Pressed by Pat Buchanan to name the leaker, Johnson refused to deny it was Libby; he furthermore stated that the perpetrator was no stranger to "scandal."
As Marc Rich's longtime lawyer, and a key figure in procuring the fugitive billionaire a presidential pardon, Lewis ""Scooter" Libby surely fits the bill.
Johnson also rebutted widespread stories that Plame wasn't an undercover intelligence officer. Clifford May, of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, has said her status was an open secret, and that she was an analyst whose life would not be placed in danger if her CIA connection was revealed. Asked by Buchanan if Plame's work would have taken her overseas, where compromising her CIA affiliation would put her in physical danger, Johnson's answer was an emphatic yes. Furthermore, he emphasized, her outing would put all her various overseas contacts in jeopardy.
Developing ...
Justin Raimondo is Editorial Director of Antiwar.com and the author, most recently, of An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard (Prometheus Books, 2000).
|
| |
|
|
Swamp Gas
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 4254
Location: On a Hill in the Lowlands |
|
Fri Oct 03, 2003 7:52 pm
|
|
|
Does this mean Pacemaker Dick will also be indicted? |
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Fri Oct 03, 2003 8:15 pm
|
|
|
I think the whole executive branch should go.
Along with any Congressional member that has helped pass unconstitutional laws be it democrat or republican.
Its the only way to send a message.
The American people shouldn't tolerate this government breaching constitutional law.
Even NWO worshiper GHW BUSH (ex prez) said outing the names of CIA agents to be "Dispicable" and "unforgiveable".
I wholeheartedly agree. Someone is going to burn for this one.
I certainly hope they get nailed right to the wall.
|
| |
|
|
Boomer Chick
Joined: 01 Sep 2003
Posts: 407
Location: Colorado |
|
Sat Oct 04, 2003 9:40 pm
|
|
|
Well, without an independent investigation, the bums can't get nailed! At this point, Ashcroft will be in charge and the higher court would be the Supremes and we know how fair they are!
Well, we'll see how it goes and what happens. Even in a court case the evidence has to be accumulated and the lawyers involved will demand evidence. If it's not given, the people will grumble and shout and the creeps will all slide into the past and out of a government job.
But what I want is their reputations as citizens to be ruined, to not be allowed to be American citizens for acts of treason! In jail if need be! Darn it! And I wanted to use stronger words!
Impeach the whole lot! Ashcroft included!
Jail 'em, nail 'em, ruin their lives like they ruined Plume's and ours! Treasonous fascists!
We are the true patriots, not them!
Sorry -- had to vent!
BC |
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Sat Oct 04, 2003 10:09 pm
|
|
|
I still say Bu$h will be out before the 2004 election.
Stay tuned.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Mech on 01-23-2004] |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page Previous
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 10:32 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
