Internal Review (a.k.a. Cover Up)

Josh Marshall's analysis is excellent here:

The entire discussion of the 'internal review' the Speaker's office conducted seems intended to drive home the point that while pretty much the entire GOP House leadership knew about the Foley 'matter', no one beside backbencher Rodney Alexander (R-LA) actually saw the emails.

...

Now, here's the problem as far as I can see this. Supposedly, no one in a position of authority ever lays eyes on these emails, presumably because they're relatively innocuous. But at the same time they can't be seen by anyone else because "family wished to maintain as much privacy as possible." Those two points don't really square in my mind.

....

So everyone's very mindful of the privacy of the family. But somehow Rep. Boehner and Rep. Reynolds found out about it from Rep. Alexander. And Reynolds mentioned it to Hastert. But Hastert doesn't remember. And Boehner told Hastert about it too. And Hastert said it was being taken care of. Only Hastert never heard about it ...

The press release attempts to "walk-back" the assertion that Speaker Hastert and other members of the GOP leadership in the House had any real knowledge that they were protecting and covering up for a pedophile.

From the speakers' press release today:

Congressman Tom Reynolds in a statement issued today indicates that many months later, in the spring of 2006, he was approached by Congressman Alexander who mentioned the Foley issue from the previous fall. During a meeting with the Speaker he says he noted the issue which had been raised by Alexander and told the Speaker that an investigation was conducted by the Clerk of the House and Shimkus. While the Speaker does not explicitly recall this conversation, he has no reason to dispute Congressman Reynold's recollection that he reported to him on the problem and its resolution.

No one in the Speaker's Office was made aware of the sexually explicit text messages which press reports suggest had been directed to another individual until they were revealed in the press and on the internet this week. In fact, no one was ever made aware of any sexually explicit email or text messages at any time.

Oh, and by the way, the Democrat on the Page Board was not informed of anything:

"As the Democratic Member of the House Page Board, any statement by Mr. Reynolds or anyone else that the House Page Board ever investigated Mr. Foley is completely untrue.

"I was never informed of the allegations about Mr. Foley's inappropriate communications with a House Page and I was never involved in any inquiry into this matter.

"The first and only meeting of the House Page Board on this matter occurred on Friday, September 29 at approximately 6 p.m., after the allegations about Mr. Foley had become public."

This is an all-out attempt to ceover-up and kill this story. Something like this, which demonstrates institutional corruption and criminality, can bring down a government. Clinton was impeached for lying about sex. The GOP House leadership is covering up for a pedophile to avoid the rightful consequences of their actions - removal from power and possible criminal prosecution.

These are the men who decide to send Americans off to war in Iraq. They say the warriors are sent to protect freedom. Not the freedom of the people, but the freedom of pasty white fat asses to protect pedophiles and bribers and women-beaters. Oh, and also to rubber-stamp the tyranny of this buffoon.

From the mouths of babes...

...comes the end of the GOP Majority. Racisits, con-men, and now, pedophiles.

What kind of moral leaders would cover up for a pedophile?

The US Capitol has become a cess pool of corruption and criminality.

Unconstitutional Part II

Even some Republicans ackowledge the "make Bush dictator" bill is unconstitutional.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), who voted for the bill even after his amendment to preserve certain rights for detainees was defeated, called the proposal "patently unconstitutional on its face."

The Rubber-stamp Congress - vote for unconstitutional bills just because Bush wants more power.

Unconstitutional

The "Military Tribunals" Act (MTA) passed by the Senate yesterday is unconstitutional. Let's compare the bill's primary stipulations with what appears in the Constitution of the United States:

MTA:
Enemy Combatants: A dangerously broad definition of “illegal enemy combatant” in the bill could subject legal residents of the United States, as well as foreign citizens living in their own countries, to summary arrest and indefinite detention with no hope of appeal. The president could give the power to apply this label to anyone he wanted.

CUS:
Article I, Section 9: The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

6th Amendment: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."


MTA:
The Geneva Conventions: The bill would repudiate a half-century of international precedent by allowing Mr. Bush to decide on his own what abusive interrogation methods he considered permissible. And his decision could stay secret — there’s no requirement that this list be published.

CUS:
8th Amendment: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."


MTA:
Habeas Corpus: Detainees in U.S. military prisons would lose the basic right to challenge their imprisonment. These cases do not clog the courts, nor coddle terrorists. They simply give wrongly imprisoned people a chance to prove their innocence.

CUS:
Article I, Section 9: The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.


MTA:
Judicial Review: The courts would have no power to review any aspect of this new system, except verdicts by military tribunals. The bill would limit appeals and bar legal actions based on the Geneva Conventions, directly or indirectly. All Mr. Bush would have to do to lock anyone up forever is to declare him an illegal combatant and not have a trial.

CUS:

Article III, Section 1: The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.


MTA:
Coerced Evidence: Coerced evidence would be permissible if a judge considered it reliable — already a contradiction in terms — and relevant. Coercion is defined in a way that exempts anything done before the passage of the 2005 Detainee Treatment Act, and anything else Mr. Bush chooses.

CUS:

8th Amendment: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."


MTA:
Secret Evidence: American standards of justice prohibit evidence and testimony that is kept secret from the defendant, whether the accused is a corporate executive or a mass murderer. But the bill as redrafted by Mr. Cheney seems to weaken protections against such evidence.

CUS:

6th Amendment: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."


MTA:
Offenses: The definition of torture is unacceptably narrow, a virtual reprise of the deeply cynical memos the administration produced after 9/11. Rape and sexual assault are defined in a retrograde way that covers only forced or coerced activity, and not other forms of nonconsensual sex. The bill would effectively eliminate the idea of rape as torture.

CUS:
8th Amendment: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

In Memoriam

Please pay your respects here.

Rhetoric Means Nothing Without Action

The 2006 Torture Act passed tonight despite strong statements of oppostion from the following Congresspersons, among others:

Harry Reid

Hillary Clinton

Barack Obama

John Kerry

Russ Feingold

Chris Dodd

Nancy Pelosi

Pat Leahy

The final vote was 65-34. They couldn't even filibuster it. Eleven Democrats and one Independent sold out the country and helped enthrone the Bush Dictatorship. Here's the list:

Tom Carper (Del.)
Tim Johnson (S.D.)
Mary Landrieu (La.)
Frank Lautenberg (N.J.)
Bob Menendez (N.J)
Bill Nelson (Fla.)
Ben Nelson (Neb.)
Mark Pryor (Ark.)
Jay Rockefeller (W. Va.)
Ken Salazar (Co.)
Debbie Stabenow (Mich.)
Joe Lieberman (Conn.)

Another nail in the coffin of the US Constitution.

I don't understand how the Dems couldn't muster a filibuster. It's depressing. Democrats do a lot of talking, but where are they when it really matters? For these 12, they are in Bush's pocket. God Almighty.

Woodward takes off the rose-colored glasses

Iraq is in a state of civil war, and it's going to get a lot worse.

When they stand up, we'll stand down...

The Iraq police academy is "a disaster."

A $75 million project to build the largest police academy in Iraq has been
so grossly mismanaged that the campus now poses health risks to recruits and
might need to be partially demolished, U.S. investigators have found.

The Baghdad Police College, hailed as crucial to U.S. efforts to
prepare Iraqis to take control of the country's security, was so poorly
constructed that feces and urine rained from the ceilings in student barracks.
Floors heaved inches off the ground and cracked apart. Water dripped so
profusely in one room that it was dubbed "the rain forest."

Also, ABC will produce a new mini-series by the people who brought you "Path to 9-11." The new film will be called "Police Academy: The Path to Democracy in Iraq." A rumor has it the opening scene is a world leader landing on an aircraft carrier wearing a giant codpiece.

Sliding Toward Dictatorship

The interrogation/detainee bill just gets worse and worse. Check it out:

Still another change would purport to eliminate the need to comply with the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement for searches conducted in the United States:

[T]he original compromise said that evidence seized "outside the United States" could be admitted in court even if it had been obtained without a search warrant, a provision Republicans and Democrats agreed was necessary to deal with the unusual circumstances of seizing evidence on the battlefield. The bill introduced Monday dropped the words "outside the United States," which Democrats said meant that prosecutors could ignore American legal standards on search warrants within the country.

None of this crap is constitutional. Congress does not have the authority to give the President this power nor to make laws that are inconsistent with the Constitution. Will the Supreme Court ever see a case that would allow them to overturn this if it gets passed? Color me doubtful.

I write an e-letter

I had to use the web-form on the congressional web sites to send this to the following congresscritters: Allen, Warner, Clinton, Reid, Hagel, Kerry, Obama, Cantor. I was able to e-mail it to Feingold. Here's the letter:

I am writing to urge you to vote against the interrogation/military tribunal/detainee bill. This is one of the most horrible pieces of legislation ever to be considered by the US Congress. It legalizes torture, it violates the Constitution, and it erodes America’s moral authority in the world.

The bill legalizes torture. We’ve all seen the photos from the prisons in Iraq. We’ve read the reports about illegal rendition and “aggressive interrogation” tactics used by the Bush Administration on terror suspects. We’ve seen the false imprisonment of individuals who had nothing to do with terrorism. If any of these things happened to a US citizen or US soldier, we would certainly accuse their captors of torture and violating human dignity. We would demand justice.

Committing these acts in the name of protecting the American people does not make it any less a violation of fundamental human rights. Waterboarding a suspected “evil-doer” is still torture. Detaining people indefinitely with no access to legal relief is still a violation of human rights. Even if torturing someone resulted in information that saved millions of lives, it does not legally excuse the torture or make torture morally right. A nation of laws upholds the law. Those responsible for torture, no matter how justified any of us believe it to be, must be held accountable under the law.

But let’s be honest. We all know that torture…excuse me, “aggressive interrogation”…does not work except in very rare and very critical situations. This administration has used these tactics far too often and far too freely for even the “a single piece of information might save millions” argument to apply. That dog won’t hunt.

Governments that engage in torture must be held accountable. Presidents that order that torture be carried out must be held accountable. By passing this bill, the US Congress not only will refuse to hold this Administration accountable, it will throw its lot in with this President, thereby becoming an accomplice to his crimes. The only lawful, constitutional, and moral course is to vote down this bill.

This nation decided long ago that no individual was above the law. September 11th did not change that. If Congress passes this bill, then it attempts to place the President above the law. This bill will, in essence, give the President the power to do anything in the name of protecting the country from terror with no accountability for his actions. This is unconstitutional. The President does not have the authority to define what torture is and the Congress does not have the authority to empower him to define it. The Congress should either redefine torture specifically or scrap this bill entirely. I urge the latter.

I hear our political leaders say we are a nation of laws. How then, is torture lawful? I hear from some of our political leaders that we are a Christian nation. Then, is torture a Christian value? I hear from our political leaders that we are a nation of freedom and liberty. In what way does torture make us freer?

Think about your oath of office. How can you honestly tell your constituents you have fulfilled your oath if you have not aggressively worked to defeat this bill? The bill is a violation of the Constitution and it is a moral abomination. The only moral action here is to do everything in your power to stop this bill from passing.

Torture is wrong. I urge you to stop this bill.

Angry Preznit

He's P-I-S-S-E-D!!!

Here's Angry Preznit on releasing the Classified National Intelligence Estimate alleged to say that the war in Iraq has made the US less safe:

It will stop all the speculation, all the politics about somebody saying something about Iraq; you know, somebody trying to confuse the American people about the nature of this enemy

Right. I'm sure no one will have anything to say about Iraq after reading it. It's a "slam-dunk!" Bush also says:

We're not going to let lies and propaganda by the enemy dictate how we win this
war.

So, first it's "somebody" who is leaking the report for partisan political purposes, then it's "the enemy" using lies and propoganda to dictate how we "win" the war.

Are these the comments of an adult human being? It doesn't even make any sense, but there will surely be some morons who read this as anyone who says the NIE says such-and-such is an "enemy." GOPers, you have your script!

Commander Codpiece really needs to get his rage under control. What a weak, petty little clown.

Today in Freedom:

A Senator gives an ode to freedom...

A Congressman gives an ode to protecting Freedom...

A blogger gives an ode to protecting Freedom...

A General gives an ode to protecting Freedom...

This has been "Today in Freedom"

HULK SMASH!!!

Click here and then play the video.

Ah, Constitutionally protected rights...

Remember when they were important and human rights were something the US promoted and tried to safeguard? Good times...

In the Post-9/11 world, Republicans believe that only by destroying freedom can we save it from TERRA!

More here.

I Write Another Letter

Bravo Mr. Somerby:

Bravo!

Your work over the last 7-plus years has been superlative, but this piece rises above even your own lofty standards. I've watched Broder for years on MTP pander to the criminals now in charge of this country. Criminals, as you point out, he helped put in place.

I read this most recent column of his and I see a lazy, inept, bitter old man who perhaps finally realizes just how horrible a mistake he has made. I wonder how difficult it is for him to clean his soiled britches now that he's realized he's helped empower a "reckless, lawless" administration.

On the other hand, it could all just be a ruse. Wouldn't be the first time! The realization that his abuse of the lofty position of "Dean of the Capitol Press Corps" has enabled a would-be tryant to tear away the last vestiges of democracy from the fabric of this nation may be too much for the old clown to comprehend or to bare. No, if he points the finger and screams "RECKLESS, LAWLESS!" loud enough, in his mind perhaps he absolves himself of any blame for the current predicament. "No one could have seen this coming! How could this have happened?"

The Dean is a vile old bastard. He and his cohort turned a blind eye for the last six years while a would-be boy-king and his minions trashed the Republic. For shame.

Best.

Inspect This

On my way home from work last night, Deputy Barney Fife himself pulled me over in my own neighborhood because I don't have a state inspection sticker. How do I know it was Barney Fife? Well, he was shaking as he walked up to the car and he didn't know what the fine was for my "offense" or the methods in which I could pay it. Oh, and he looked like he was 12.

So, according to Deputy Fife, if I get a state inspection done by my court date (that's right, you have to go to fucking court for a $15 infraction), the violation will be forgiven. So, now I have to find a mechanic who gives good inspection. Let's put it this way, I want to go in, pay $15, and ten minutes later walk out with the damn decal. If I go somewhere and they tell me I need $300 in mainenance to pass inspection, I might just go postal.

And for the record, the inspection law is one of the worst abuses of government regulation known to human kind. It does nothing to improve vehicle safety or protect the environment. It's essentially legalized extortion. The large corporations that own most franchised repair shops dump cash into politicians' campaign funds, the politicians put this law in place and direct law enforcement to emphasize enforcement of it, and you and I get hosed. We have to comply with the law by having some mechanic tell us ten diffferent things that have to be repaired or we fail inspection. "Mr. Hippocrat, item #15 on the list of things we've found - wiper blades are worn, $50 to replace." Hence, a $300 repair bill and big profits for the CEOs and corporate boards.

Most government functions in this country today are a result of the corporate sector buying government power and using it to transfer wealth from the middle and working class to the super wealthy. That is why I am not a down-the-line liberal - government is far too invasive and far too powerful. I am against the concentration of power, regardless of the cause or purpose.