I wish I am wrong but when I look at the influence of members of the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations, and apparatuses such as the Heritage Foundation, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Brookings Institution, AIPAC, the Hoover Institution, the American Enterprise Institute, I shutter. Ok, let me throw in the Boy Scouts of America as well!

Hillary, Obama, and McCain have all bought into the illusionary “war on terror” and they have all bought into the “manifest destiny” model of conquest to control other people’s territory and resources.

No. I am far from wrong on this one, I’m afraid. But I sure would be happy if I were.

Tube

What unappetizing lineups!

Still, an improvement in most cases over what we have now, so there’s that…

So you see McCain as Bush I redux. Well, we’ve seen worse.

Many of these folks are superannuated. They will never answer the bugles again, methinks. Some of them, I thought, sorry to say, actually deceased!

Anyway, I hope you are wrong here. I can’t drum up much enthusiasm for these rosters and indeed some fear is more appropriate!

DW

SO.

What are your thoughts of the line up.

John McCain
• Henry Kissinger
• Richard Armitage, former deputy secretary of state, covert operative and lifelong Bush ally
• Robert “Bud” McFarlane, Reagan/Bush national security adviser, Iran, Contra
• William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard (neocon)
• Alexander Haig, Reagan/Bush secretary of state
• George Shultz, Reagan/Bush secretary of state, Hoover Institution, Bechtel
• Brent Scowcroft, Ford, George H.W. Bush national security adviser
• James Woolsey, former CIA director
• Lawrence Eagleburger, George H.W. Bush secretary of state
• William Ball, Reagan administration Navy secretary
• Colin Powell

Barack Obama
• Zbigniew Brzezinski
• Anthony Lake, Clinton administration national security adviser
• Sarah Sewall, Clinton administration deputy secretary of defense, counter, insurgency czar
• Richard Clarke, Clinton and Bush administration counter, terrorism czar
• Susan Rice, Clinton administration Africa specialist and NSC member, Brookings
• Bruce Riedel, former CIA officer, NSC Near East and Asian affairs, Brookings

Hillary Clinton
• Bill Clinton
• Madeline Albright, Clinton administration secretary of state
• Sandy Berger, Clinton administration national security adviser
• Richard Holbrooke, Clinton administration UN ambassador
• Gen. Wesley Clark, Clinton era Kosovo commander
• Leslie Gelb, Council on Foreign Relations, former State and Defense Department official
• Martin Indyk, Clinton administration Israel ambassador, Brookings
• Strobe Talbott, Clinton administration deputy secretary of state, co, creator of Caspian oil “6+2” group, Brookings
• Jeffrey Smith, former CIA general counsel

To tell you the truth, I’M DEEPLY WORRIED, deeply worried!

I just read your earlier longer post addressed to me…sorry to have missed it; its very hard to keep track of the constant downwardly scrolling blizzard of threads and posts.

I kind of agree with your main point: 2008 is going to be a continuation of a new-bosses-same-as-the-old-bosses leadership no matter who gets elected.

You may be right.

But the key for me is not the guy at top. It really isn’t. It’s the political culture that moves into power and although Washington has an amazing ability to neutralize reformist waves, this year may be something special, because sadly, the economy may be going south for a little while, and that gives the reformers ALOT of leverage. Just wait and see! It will be a very busy first four years for everyone.

But on a more humane note…

I suggest we follow the State of Georgia’s lead (see one of JT’s earlier threads on this topic) and use the sentence of banishment for all the malfeasors of the current administration.

Assuming about 2,200 mid and upper level personnel, we could life-banish them to 10,000 acres or so in the Great Dismal Swamp, where they could gainfully pass their time building a new shining “City on a Hill” or more accurately, a shantytown on a tussock!

WOW, talk about jeremiads!

With emotions like this raging, we might as well roll out the tumbrels!

“First stop?” We have all long suspected that you have been visiting other sites. No matter, it is great to have you with us!

The soft and corrupt underbelly of the spineless and unprincipled Democrats was thoroughly exposed from the very moment of the massive electoral fraud inflicted upon voters in this country in 2000, aided by a lawless “Supreme Court” (an agency whose criminality makes its function so painfully ironic).

These contemptible, inhuman Democratic enablers of the mass-murdering, Constitution-shredding, obscenely profiteering band of criminals posing as a “government” should go down equally with the R-party gangsters and crooks as the most repulsive bunch of thugs, reptiles and invertebrates known to civilized Man. That list, to me, would include the likes of Hillary Clinton, Diane Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi. They are as much a part of the deliberate mass-murder and (U.S.) government-sponsored terror inflicted upon Iraq and her people, as the clueless psychopath in the WH and his bloodthirsty, criminal enablers. Note that I am not even including revolting Quislings such as Zell Miller and LIEberman. In recent years, the takeover of these United States by the AIPAC lobby is complete, as the utterly horrified world (including many, many humane and caring Jewish and Israeli people) watches helplessly.

At such times, one would normally hope for someone like John Conyers to take a principled stand in order to bring these criminals (who surpass the Nixon bunch by light years in their genocidal crimes against humanity, and deserve trials for massive crimes against humanity) to accountability and justice. Yet, the lure of power (and who knows what else- perhaps hush funds and palm grease?) or fake notions of “loyalty” seem to have usurped all human ideals from the vast majority of these public figures. SHAME, A THOUSAND TIMES, UPON ALL OF THEM! The disgraceful treatment meted out to Dennis Kucinich, Mike Gravel, Ron Paul, and the way their campaigns for an honorable return to decency in government was snuffed out by the criminal machinery of this country (corporations + media- A GATHERING OF WHORES whose very faces are deeply repulsive to decent human beings, including the real women known by that appellation)- these do not bode well for the future of this ruthless military behemoth hell-bent upon wreaking death and destruction upon human beings worldwide.

Impeachment and criminal prosecution should have commenced as soon as these spineless Democrats recovered their majorities in the Congress and Senate by falsely claiming to do exactly that prior to the 2006 elections. ALONG WITH THE MURDERERS IN THE WH, THEY TOO HAVE PROVEN THEMSLEVES TO BE ABSOLUTE TRAITORS. There are no words of shame harsh enough for these demons in human form.

Yes, there will be a Democrat in the White House come 2009. After much ruminating I’ve come to the conclusion that Bush/Cheney will go quietly into infamy in 2009. There will be elections and a Democrat will win. Shortly after taking office, that Democrat will announce that Social Security is in grave danger along with Medicare and, rather than attack the inflationary system of health care that contributes to the instability of Medicare, s/he will announce a major overhaul of Social Security, kind of like the overhaul that was engineered to screw middle and lower class Americans who are faced with bankruptcy.

While Bush’s cronies walk away with literally billions of dollars from the Treasury, lower and middle class Americans will be forced into a means-testing system to determine whether or not they should survive in retirement. And no matter who the Democrat is who gets elected make no mistake about it: Social Security will be in the crosshairs.

Clinton eviscerated welfare while pimping NAFTA, GATT, and WTO. Don’t expect anything different from either of the current Democratic candidates.

I seriously doubt that you can substantiate this. If you focus only on integrity, my guess is that Bush is far and away the number one liar. And he is not very good at it. Are there any historians in this group that can answer the question?

It shouldn’t be too difficult to remember the interim election and all the hype about change if the Dems won. And by god the American public actually came out and voted them in. And then?

Well, the Dems can’t not fund the imperial troops. Oh, a surge? Oh yes, oh yes! We can’t look weak! Oh, the Dems can’t not pass anything that has the word terror in it. Oh goodness, the Dems can’t not pass the FISA Bill without being sure that ATT gets covered. Thank you so much Diane Feinstein. Just how often has Diane bent over and taken one for the “gipper”? Gee, censure Diane? NO, recall the bitch!

If the House comes back after break and really takes a stand it will be a first. Do I have hope? No. But I’d love to be wrong on this one.

And then there is NO GUTS NANCY. She’s the leader? Give me a break!
Oh, we can’t impeach, it might upset Bush’s lackeys and running dogs and then we might not get elected.

Well, I believe there is a huge dormant sector of Americans that are looking for change in this country and to date what we get is business as usual.

Look at the line up!

HILLARY. Hanging out with Rupert Murdoch? Bill running up to Kennebunkport to play with Daddy Bush? Gosh, I hope Bill is investing correctly, The Carlyle Group anyone? Hillary votes for the imperialist war, she votes to fund the war, she votes for the Patriot Act, she refused to filibuster the Military Commissions Act which fundamentally overturned habeas corpus and even Ann Colter is leaning toward her! Now that is spooky.
And as President she would keep the imperial army in Iraq for the same 100 years that McCain is talking about but only to protect America’s vital interests! You may want to check out America’s vital interests in Iraq when you get time but to save you time – - -it’s everything. The corporate class has bought up(perhaps stole is more apt) Iraq and all of its infrastructure, factories and banks. And soon the oil will be taken as well. What do the Iraq people get? At the moment, not even jobs because Corporate Ownership has sub contracted all the work to “cheeper” labor from outside Iraq. OH JOY! Now where did I put my explosive belt again? Looks like Business as usual to me.

THEN BARACK. He makes a big deal that he didn’t support the war but not from the high moral principal that pre-emptive war is wrong but from the frame that he didn’t think that it would work!

Somehow what has been lost in the debate is pre-emptive war is double speak for aggression. Which in my way of thinking requires the troops to be arrested and held in The Hague as war criminals. Along with a very long list of the administration and Congress! Only in an ideal world would that ever come to pass.

What Americans have missed is that we ARE the bad guys.

With Obama you are not going to see the troops come home either. He is right there in front with McCain and Clinton in threatening Iran. And Obama will attack Pakistan if the intelligence is such that we could get Osama!

Osama-Obama—Obama-Osama, there has got to be a rap song in that somewhere.

Obama votes for all the military funding and wants to add 92,000 more troops to the military to keep our military the best in the world!

Sounds like business as usual to me.

And then to add to Barack’s business as usual stance, like Clinton he voted against the Military Commissions Act but then turned around and refused to filibuster the Act to prevent it from becoming law.

And to cap it for me, Obama is being advised by Anthony Lake and Zbigniew Brzezinski. Now those guys should take the wind out of the sails of anyone who tries to frame Obama as a candidate of HOPE and CHANGE. Sure he is!

As for McCain, well he’s too white! Look at him. Do you want a ghost for President?

So America has to face this coming election from a very sober position.
How in the world can anyone ever say, “America is the greatest country” when all we have got to show the world are these three clowns as the best leadership the country can come up with in 2008?

During the ‘06 campaign, the campaign was used to justify taking impeachment off the table- so as not to antagonize moderates. Once the Democrats won by an overwhelming majority, that excuse no longer held water. Still, within a few days after become Speaker and Chair of Judiciary, Pelosi and Conyers hastened to assure us that impeachment was still off the table. The deal still held, and Bush and Cheney are STILL being protected- they can do anything they want, with impunity, and they do.

What’s the tradeoff? What do the Dems get in return? Biden hinted recently that it was/is an agreement not to start war with Iran, when he said that impeachment hearings would begin at once if they did that. Maybe it’s a promise not to impose martial law and suspend elections. Maybe it’s blackmail of many individual Congresspeople. Whatever- the reasons given simply don’t hold water.

It’s obvious that the way out of Iraq is through impeachment. The way to prevent an attack on Iran is impeachment. The way to address global warming is impeachment. Etc, etc, etc. As long as Bush and Cheney are in office, they will block all good moves and continue to pursue policies that enrich themselves and their superrich friends at the expense of the rest of us.

And Congress is complicit. There’s a protection racket going on. There’s no other plausible explanation.

So we need a clean sweep of Congress- see http://www.newbroomcoalition.org.

Peace,

Carol Wolman
Green Candidate for Congress
CA District 1
Cochair, Impeach Bush-Cheney

Re-reading my posts in light of your kind words, I note with a lot of chagrin I misled everybody: The Congressional Research Service, not the Congressional Reporting Service.

I am a living errata sheet!

Also, unlike the OLC, the CRS researches EVERYTHING imaginable. With 2000+ reports a year, its not unlikely they’ve done an analysis of the bricks in the chimneys of your neighborhood at some time or other!

The “Investigating the DOJ” report makes for interesting reading. Not because it reveals any current malfeasance–it doesn’t and it was not commissioned to. In my uninformed opinion, the epi-center of the criminal behavior in this administration was centered in the DOJ. The OVP had its role to play also, and outrages at Labor and Interior are still below the radar, but if you have to pick an agency: start at DOJ.

And then work your way back up. Felony crimes were possibly committed and left unreported. A very ugly picture and one with no precedent to my limited knowledge.

Basically the Administration did the legal equivalent of trying to raise itself in the air by pulling on its own shoes. They would have their house lawyers declare something legal then go ahead and act under color of not law, but the advice of legality.

When their advisors balked, they would simply replace them with more compliant models. Utterly ruthless, and the greatest threat to the rule of law this country has ever seen.

I think you have assigned everyone’s President’s Weekend reading
- the subject titles alone ’speak volumes’, as it were

p.s. How ’bout that expired PAA, huh? huh?

“No Confidence” Votes and Other Forms of Congressional Censure of Public Officials, June 11, 2007

Presidential Advisers’ Testimony Before Congressional Committees: an Overview, updated April 10, 2007 [NOTE DATE]

Statute of Limitations in Federal Criminal Cases: An Overview, updated April 9, 2007 [DATE]

and lastly, my favorite:

Congressional Investigations of the Department of Justice, 1920-2007: History, Law, and Practice, October 3, 2007

Draw the appropriate conclusions.

We all need to add to our sophistication about how the government is working.

The affairs between the branches are conducted by representatives and officials who are harried, overworked, and basically operating in a perpetual fog. They are expected to be experts on everything from pre-stressed concrete fracture under load, to fish counts on obscure waterways. To alleviate that fog, they call on experts to help them. The Executive branch for legal matters has its OLC, the Congress has its CRS.

If you want to really know what is concerning both branches, what they are worried about, what actions they are contemplating, what defenses they are readying, study the reports they request from their respective “law firms”.

We have talked about the OLC and the declassified memos, but lets look at the Congressional Reporting Service and their “product”.

Here are some topics the 110th Congress (the democrats, my friends) have sought clarification on and it is very illustrative:

Direct Assaults Against Presidents, Presidents-Elect, and Candidates, updated Jan 7 2008

Perjury Under Federal Law: a Brief Overview, updated Dec 27, 2007

Obstruction of Congress: a Brief Overview of Federal Law Relating to Interference with Congressional Activities, Dec 27, 2007 (Same day as supra!)

Obstruction of Justice: an Overview of Some of the Federal Statutes That Prohibit Interference with Judicial, Executive, or Legislative Activities, Dec 27, 2007

Proposals to Reform “Holds” in the Senate, updated Dec 20, 2007 (we know who prompted this!)

Federal Tort Claims Act, updated Dec 1l, 2007

Congress’s Contempt Power: a Sketch, Aug 1, 2007

Congress’s Contempt Power: Law, History, Practice, and Procedure, July 24th 2007 [PLEASE READ THIS ONE, IF YOU WILL]

Recess Appointments Made by President George W Bush, January 20, 2001-June 4, 2007 updated June 14 2007

and so forth and so on.

Here’s the website for your further research:

http://opencrs.com/

Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
When it comes to incisive comment,
Patty C, is better than you (and you, and you)!

Roses are red,
The stems are green,
When it comes to ipse dixit bluster,
DW is an unstoppable cut-and-paste machine!

I do hope JT is delegating the site’s maintainence and taking a nice out-of-town vacation or some such!

When did she say that? She said impeachment is off the table, but oversight would continue and where that leads, we would have to see. The first part of the statement is commonly quoted — the second half is studiously ignored.

It’s likely that Cheney could be impeached. If the desire is to impeach the President, that will scuttle the effort. If the effort is restricted to Cheney, I believe that the Speaker will let it go through. The contempt citations are a positive sign in that direction.

Now, I don’t expect Bush or Cheney to be asked to come back in any serious advisory capacity in future administrations, but you do have to wonder about the equally incompetent and constitutionally ignorant underlings of the Executive Department.

I don’t feel the problem is we’re shooting for too much impeachment–I feel the problem is we’re settling for not enough of it!

Thanks for your support!

It’s not Valentines Day anymore,
but you are still a Sweetie!

BEN FRANK–please don’t mention elective office for JT. He is destined for SCOTUS!

LESSER EVIL: nice post, but the contempt citations already in train may lead to impeachment ultimately, and its about time the Dems stopped political tea leaf reading and started honoring their oaths.

TUBULAR SOCK: Such dispair and cynicism! Maybe the Dems may surprise you yet-especially the House. I can tell you that there is probably a lot of emotion tightly bottled up on the left side of the aisle and as we used to say “payback is a medivac!”

GOGONZO: Right as rain on the facts. Good observations.

MITCH: You too, but “moronic brain damaged loser”? Why don’t you say what you REALLY think?

LESTER WEEVAL: With a name like that you must be from my part of the country! Anyway, I don’t think there is a reciprocity like that operating. The GOP in fact has waged such a wide-ranging attack on the Dems for the last 8 years that it would astound you. It even reaches to intimidating traditional corporate donors to the party. Its a fight to the death I am afraid. Or rather a fight for survival as a viable political institution.

RJ CRANE: Great post. censure is an option, but as a last option if other events don’t work out. USC Title 18, chapter 1, 4, misprision of felony

TOM: What has the poor Speaker done to earn your wrath?

MAXIMAHEART: Senators Kennedy and Feingold probably appreciate your support, but will have to stay in their current chamber. Kucinich, though is an excellent choice!

SERENA1313: Great post! Good thoughts.

CHABUKA: Anyone who quotes from Federalist 41 is a friend of mine! I was with you and admiring your contribution until you veered off and attacked the career people. They are definitely not the problem!!! Rather look at the mid management/asst director level of the cake where GOP loyalists with minimal or indeed anti-qualifications have been installed in hordes. This is where the mischief has been. Ever wonder why the GOP has been trying to weaken the whistleblower protections?

Ok, I’m worn out. welcome everybody!

But you’re right, his absence here is noticeable and I am beginning to worry a bit!!

At least you’re still here holding down the fort.

But since JT MAY be on some kind of short-list for some appointment POSSIBLY, maybe he has to avoid creating a paper trail that could be used against him!!!

One has to consider such things….. ”

***

DW, that would be dandy-IF HE DECIDES TO LEAVE US, ALONE, IN THE DARK
-FOREVER AND EVER!!!

I thought he would like to know ‘we noticed’, is all…

But since JT MAY be on some kind of short-list for some appointment POSSIBLY, maybe he has to avoid creating a paper trail that could be used against him!!!

One has to consider such things…..

This net reaches wide and deep.

I’m glad you are layin’ low, although I think I speak for everybody – “we miss your face”…

Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and Happiness.

Jefferson went on wisely to warn that long-established governments must not be changed for “light and transient reasons.” He added, however, that the documented record of a government’s “long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing … a design to reduce them under an absolute Despotism” creates for its citizens a right and a duty “to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

The “Despotism” Americans face today is not that of George III’s Britain, nor is it the expanding Northern commercial and social juggernaut the Secessionists despised and feared. No, Americans are confronted and oppressed by an “absolute Despotism” of incompetence, cowardice, and self-interest, a despotism controlled by an aristocracy of male and female life-time office servers who have forgotten that they are hired help, not demigods. These men and women care only for the perpetuation of their power and sinecures and only act to preserve their power. They care not a jot about protecting Americans and their land.

Lew Rockwell

The minute Pelosi said “impeachment is off the table” she overstepped her authourity. It is beyond me why Pelosi took impeachment off the table because by doing so it guarantees Bush & Cheney free rite of passage. Meaning no matter what they do they will not be held accountable.

If Pelosi had stated something to the effect that the language in the Constitution is unequivocal regarding impeachment, but at present nothing leads her to believe impeachment is necessary adding notwithstanding they would follow the facts wherever they lead, etc… hence if merited then appropriate actions would be pursued. However she didn’t, so as it stands now, there is no incentive for Bush and/or Cheney to keep within the bounds of the law.

Churchill stated that ‘one of the first strengths of democracy is holding leaders to account for their decisions…’ Until the public acknowledges that the rule of law is meant for everyone, Bush and Cheney will continue abusing their powers and breaking the law without accountability.

Vote them out! Replace Nancy Pelosi with Edward Kennedy or Russ Feingold or Dennis Kucinich, etc.

That said, I have always wondered why the House Dems won’t consider censure resolutions of both Bush and Cheney? Why not at least start with the least offensive measure and try and get support for that before moving up the ladder for impeachment.

I think every sane person realizes there are plenty of good grounds to impeach both Bush and Cheney and in order to repair the damage they have done, this would be the right way to proceed. Unfortunately we don’t have enough Dems willing to risk their political careers in order to do what’s best for the country. While my web site continues to urge impeachment and support every effort that pushes for this, I think the window to begin this might already be closed or now part of the 2008 election strategies.

That said we all should be making sure the Dem candidate for President and those running for Congress and the Senate assure everyone they would support an independent investigation of Bush’s administration with intent of indicting and prosecuting any of them for crimes once a Dem becomes President. RJ Crane

It only appears as though we have been manipulated. Our elected officials, and a generally cool-headed constituency geared toward the democratic process, are the only things that stand between us and immediate resolution of the issues that concern us – most notably, those responsible.

That is why, in my view, is is SO important to proceed, during THIS term, with any and all pending criminal investigations – from FISA/NSA, Torture/Waterboarding, the US Attorney Firing Scandal, to No-Bid, Overseas, Iraq/Afghanistan, Military Contracts
- including Halliburton and Blackwater, to name a couple.

It is also why “they” would prefer matters do not proceed. And there lies the rub.

This time, I wouldn’t look for trends stemming from any past Presidency. Throughout history you come across sentiments expressing
that theirs were “extraordinary times’ and, now, ours is one of
those extraordinary times, as well.

The Republican wing will be ever so grateful to future Democrats for not impeaching the Republican leaders, and when favors are owed then the fox will certainly raid the chicken coop.

This “pay-back” scenario is likely WHY the Dems are not proceeding with impeachment – they are eying the gravy train ahead.

So the question becomes whether it’s too-little-too-late or better late than never. Personally I think whenever invertabrates show some spine it is a good thing.

If I was sure that a real investigation would take place after the Democrats win then your position is well taken. However, I already can smell ALL THE NOBLE REASONS why the country must move on and NOT engage in the past!

Even after Nixon got his — he was pardoned!

Even after a new Democratic President takes office will that President open up the Presidential papers and government documents so the public could see what was really going on? My guess is NO! National security and all that will be the excuse. Why? Simple. It’s a closed club. We have a one party system and that system is MONEY. The Democrats are as covered in blood for their participation in the last eight years as are the Republicans.

I fear and KNOW that even if the Democrats win it will be business as usual.

And that saddens me a great deal.

First, I think the Democratic leadership believes impeachment ultimately backfired on the GOP with support for President Clinton actually growing as the impeachment actions got nastier. I think the Democratic leaders see it as a risky political proposition that has less potential political payoff as we draw closer to the 2008 elections. I think they fear that impeachment might energize and motivate a conservative base that is currently quite demoralized and subdued. I think they wish to avoid poking the “radcon monster” with an impeachment stick.

Secondly, I don’t believe that the Democratic leadership feels a strong grassroots push on impeachment. At least not strong enough to merit movement on the issue. Unlike the radical Republicans in Congress, and their radcon radio cheerleaders, who embraced impeachment as a part of their “tear down the government” agenda, Democrats actually respect the institutions of government and tread carefully to respect the same. We are not Republicans and shouldn’t act like Republicans. Democrats are better than that.

But that brings up the question of how can you respect our government and at the same time tolerate the Constitutional excesses of the Bush Administration? The “prevent future abuses” argument that has been discussed here. I think the Dem leadership feels the best way to prevent future Constitutional excesses, is to make sure the radical Republicans don’t capture control of our government again. They don’t want to “double down” on impeachment at the risk of jeopardizing our party’s current favorable position with the nation’s voters. They believe that we can make Congressional gains and win the White House without messing with impeachment and taking the risk that this action backfires. And I think they are likely right.

My only conditions regarding this choice of path, is that we fully pursue empowerment of Congressional subpoenas to compel Bushites to testify under oath. That’s a balance of power issue that impeachment can remedy quickly, as there is no executive privilege right in impeachment investigations. So if we aren’t going to impeach, we must find another way to enforce Congressional subpoenas, or the Legislative branch has abandoned all hope of meanful oversight of the Executive branch.

My second condition is if we win the White House in November, then in 2009, we completely, fully, and publicly investigate the excesses of the Bush Administration as an example to future American governments. I can wait if political expediency dictates. But it’s something that must ultimately be done, like the Church Hearings on the CIA in the 1970s. We can’t sweep this stuff under the rug forever. But I might agree that the timing could be better with a stronger Congressional majority and a Democratic President.

Thanks for all you’ve done over the last several years. I still remember the great testimony you gave to Conyers at his basement hearing in 2006, when the spying revelations first came out.
http://www.archive.org/download/illegal_spying/nsa_hearing1-turley.mp3

Is there any chance you would ever consider running for Congress? If you live in Maryland the deadline may have passed, otherwise it’s probably still possible for you to run this year. You don’t need a million bucks because you have the truth behind you. And with that comes a million activists willing to work for you.

Every American that knows about these abuses of power must ensure there is a real Candidate running to oppose the current enabler serving in their district. You know, as per your testimony, that this Congress has not upheld their oath of office. It is our duty, to America’s children, to replace them with Real Americans that will uphold the Constitution.

If not you, who?
If not now, when?

Please consider what your candidacy would do for America. And if not, perhaps you could plug the idea and/or website http://www.PeaceCandidates.com during your next appearance with Keith on Countdown