New Classified Cover-ups by Our Rogue Exec. Office

What do you do when you're a nation at war, several of your officials are about to be busted on a variety of felonies, and the secrecy-card is about to expire?
When is doubt...VACATION-IT-OUT!!!
va-ca-tion...all I ever wanted...va-ca-tion, GOT to get away...
Yep, since everything is going soooo well in Iraq, it's time to put it on the back burner and let it simmer. Our entire Congress and the Rogue Executive branch are going to do exactly what the Iraqi Parliament is going to do about the war - go on vacation for the entire month of August! It's beyond me how our government has the nerve to scold the Iraqi Parliament for not meeting benchmarks and going on vacation, when our Congress intends to do the very same thing! Not that the move is shocking, or strays at all from the hypocritical M.O. of this administration or anything...


Packing everything up over the last week, to try to take it with them and possibly disappear-it all with public forgetfulness?...
Here are just some of the things they have in their classified suitcase:

---1) Despite Cheney's assertion that his office doesn't require oversight in the handling of classified documents, a second person has been convicted of passing classified info (originally pleaded guilty). He sent strategic information to the Philippines, to a group that was planning a political-coup to over-throw their president. The classified documents were sent by one of Dick's former aides, via Dick's office phone/fax. He worked as a military aide for both Gore and Cheney, then was an intelligence analyst for the FBI - he was just sentenced to prison for ten years.

---2) Not only has Cheney refused oversight from the Intelligence Security Office since 2002 and suggested having it abolished. but now the Justice Department admitted that the oversight board responsible for identifying intelligence abuses didn't report a single thing for the first five and a half years of this administration! They literally ignored hundreds of claims from the FBI, determining nothing about the validity of the alleged abuses. Their first report was filed last year and I haven't looked to see if they covered anything more than 2005, but I doubt it.

---3) Cheney's Energy Task Force: There was finally some coverage of the notorious meetings; however, it was severely played-down by the negligent press. The press has generally taken the position that there was nothing to be so secretive about. The press made the release trivial, reporting; Cheney met with the environmental agencies for consultation (that he said he had) after the policy-making meetings. Instead, he consulted in at least 40 meetings with energy producers' special interest groups. I don't think the public is as concerned with the environmental groups (that Cheney didn't even bother to show up for), at least not as concerned as we are with having information as to who his consulting team consisted of, and what was said in those 40 other meetings. The press pretended that the people involved were pretty non-sequential, burying the names way in the back of articles - when it should have been front-page, screaming headline, NEWS!

As it turns out, Cheney's Energy Task Force was made-up of some lobbyists, and oil baron-types, some who later cashed-out as environmental agency workers (Dept. of the Interior), and they all helped author the US energy policy. Three of them have already been convicted in the Abramoff case, and this is the detail that Cheney is REALLY hiding. Three convicted officials that Cheney consulted with to legislate national energy policies, now convicted felons serving time for taking bribes.
PRESS: "There you go, secret revealed, strange that they fought so hard to cover this up...Move along! Nothing to see here!"

---4) While the Democrats in the Senate were holding an all-night session to get some sort of benchmark for troops withdrawal into the Iraq plan, the Republicans and pundits were busy misconstruing it as "political theater" and a "stunt." The fact that people are actually believing this, just goes to show how invested Americans are in this war/occupation; not at all. An all-night Senate session is the very least of which can be sacrificed for our troops! To call an attempt to do the will of the growing-majority of the people, and to get the business of wartime dealt with in a timely manner (as should be)...to call this a "stunt" shows absolutely no understanding of how Congress works (or is at least, a show of the belief that viewers don't understand). The press was also reporting that "Democrats couldn't achieve a simple majority"; an out-right LIE. The Republicans' filibuster required MORE than a simple majority to have it passed, and had there not been the filibuster the closure vote would have passed. The vote that didn't pass was to blocked an "up or down" VOTE, it was just a vote to end the debate; not an actual vote on the measure itself. We obviously need more action in Congress in order to get anything done thee days, and I can't understand why anybody would be so reluctant to support Congress. that amendment was far from spectacular, but it would have been the first real legislation for an exit-strategy!

Let the records show: Republican Senators have absolutely no intentions whatsoever to even allow a vote on a plan to bring the troops home.

---5) Harriet Miers (former council to Bush) is currently in contempt of Congress' subpoena in regards to the US Attorney purge scandal - on Bush's dime. Bush has not officially asserted his executive privilege - yet - nor have the documents been specified as to what may or may not be released (according to Bush). Regardless, her required testimony is being contested by Bush on this basis. Miers will be cited in contempt if things don't change soon. Chairman Conyers of the Judiciary Committee sent/released a letter today addressed to Bush's attorney to inform them that their claims of executive privilege have been deemed invalid and the committee insists upon Miers appearing - as well as the requested documents.

---6) The same judge that ruled Cheney could keep his Energy Task Force meetings secret, has now dismissed a civil suit against Cheney, filed by former covert CIA agent Valerie Plame. Plame's attorney is going to appeal the judgment of course, and I hope she looks to recuse the judge that dismissed the case on a prejudicial basis!

It seems to me that the ruling that has kept those energy meetings classified was the precedent that created the path to secrecy in which this administration has depended upon so heavily.

---7) The Executive branch found yet another opportunity to use its executive privilege, in the "friendly-fire" case of Corporal Pat Tillman; the story of how fratricide was first showcased by the government as a great American hero's sacrifice for his country, only to discover that the Pentagon knew what happened all along and had attempted to completely bury the story.

If you are unfamiliar with Tillman's story, there is a really great 7-part expose that is authored by a military man that has done several interviews with Tillman's mother. There has been some speculation that the Pentagon had decided to capitalize on Tillman's service and death, to encourage enlistments and bolster American support for the war. Some say it may have even been the purpose for his murder in the first place. That is the only thing that could possibly explain why the rest of his records are being held secret under executive privilege now. In response to a committee's request for all documents and records concerning Tillman, they received "10,000 pages" - of newspaper clippings. Upon reasserting the request for military records etc...they were refused on the basis of executive privilege, and told, "We already gave you ten thousands pages worth of documents!" Seriously, what other possible reason could Bush have for covering-up and obstructing the investigation into Corporal Tillman's tragic death?

---8) Cheney will most likely claim executive privilege AGAIN for his involvement in the illegal wiretapping program (despite his recent claims not to actually be part of the Executive Branch). Cheney's legal advisers asked for the same extension given to Bush for complying to subpoenas for documentation, and it was granted. The only real problem with the extension was that there was no rescheduled mandatory date for compliance.

WOOO HOOO! Only this administration gets ALL of the powers with NONE of the responsibilities! Well, and the next one will too, and the next...but only if we let them get away with it this time.

In the words of Lt. Col. Bob Bowman:

"If the government has nothing to hide, why is it hiding everything?"

Iraq "Progress" Impeders Punished

Dissenters Beware

The Republicans in the Senate had filibustered a vote; apparently, it's NOT so "outrageous" for them anymore. The all-night session there last night was called because of the filibuster, that was blocking a (formerly demanded) "simple up or down vote." the vote was for an actual plan to leave Iraq by next spring. I hope all the Senators that have been saying they are for an end but didn't vote that way last night are catching-it GOOD from their constituents today...Yesterday while the Senate was preparing for a long night, Bush was busy making a law to strip anybody of all their money and property if an attempt is made to disrupt or impede his stay-the-course mission in Iraq.

According to the Executive Order signed yesterday, anybody that is considered to be, "threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq" may have ALL their property and assets seized! Come on, by this standard Bush should have everything taken from him for undermining the Iraqi Parliament's legislation to begin removing foreign troops and another refusing to sell their oil!

If you read this order carefully, you'll notice there aren't many specific qualifying factors (numerous loop-holes to reach anybody anywhere); it's just a generalization that could easily include protesters, peace organizations, unions, and any other entity or organization that seeks to end the occupation of Iraq. It will be determined by the three the Secretaries; of State, Treasury, & Defense. Here are some of the ways a person could be implicated; "materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or services in support of,..." It barely provides for the protection of humanitarian efforts, but if they show any discord that is a considered a political view on how to maintain "peace or stability," then I suppose they may be subject to losing everything as well. I shudder to think how this will be abused abroad...

Now combine yesterday's constitutional-atrocity, with the two following things that have already been passed;

1) National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD) 51 / AKA: HSPD 20 on 5/9/7.

2) The Military Commissions Act (MCA) 2006 , just before the midterm elections.


1) The NSPD 51 or HSPD 20, was passed two months ago (May 9th).

This directive basically gives Bush the responsibility to manage everything in cases of "catastrophic emergency," and to declare things as such. It claims its purpose is to make everything as efficient as possible under these circumstances, but actually puts all our response agencies (such as FEMA) ultimately under the thumb and management of the president (the new shadow-government structure!).

Here are some of the more disturbing pieces of NSPD 51:

A) Definition 2b) - "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;"
* It clearly says that any location qualifies, so it could be nationally, or internationally. Meaning that any of these things could be considered "effecting the US": an earthquake in the Middle East, another Katrina or other natural disaster, a stock-market crash, another metro-bombing in London, or a protest that distracted Congress or blocked traffic in a major city. Added under another definition, the following are listed as emergencies; "...including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies;"

B) When you circle your around to get through definitions 2c, 2d & 2h you come to understand that the president works in concert with Congress & the Judicial Branch - only as a courtesy ("comity"), because he is the ultimate Decider in all major emergencies.
* The Decider also gets to decide what is and is not, a "Catastrophic Emergency."


2) It was about eight months ago when the Military Commissions Act passed (9/27/6). Inside you find that anybody labeled an "enemy combatant" can loose their right to habeas corpus. An enemy combatant status can be given to anyone considered a threat, at the sole discretion or determination of the president (and a few other select high-ranking officials).

Some say that it's "debatable" as to whether or not the right to habeas corpus that is usually accompanied by indefinite imprisonment without a trial, can be or may not be applicable to Americans (who can, of course, be considered "enemy combatants"). I'd say this makes it completely plausible, and it hasn't been defined otherwise or more clearly since it passed. Honestly, today, I'm disgusted that I'm able to say I wouldn't be surprised if somebody told me there are Americans that have already disappeared as "enemy combatants."

As we well know by example now, Bush considers almost anybody with a differing opinion a threat. Some of the examples we have of his arrogant righteous dominance shown are; firing people (we're up to our 6th or 7th Commander on the Ground, also 9 US Attorneys removed), imprisoned dissenters (many conscientious objectors, i.e. Lieutenant Watada), put lives in danger (Plame, the CIA, Americans, & Middle Easterners), severely diminished capabilities needed for security (CIA, FBI, FEMA), disembodied or disenfranchised bodies of government (Congress and Judicial Branch), or just plain ignored them (70%+ Americans that want out of Iraq, Intelligence reports). There is no prejudice when it comes to Bush dispelling a person or entity, they only have one thing in common; dissent, a disagreement that amounts to disloyalty in Bush's mind.

Many of the people that were willing accomplices, the Yea-sayers have also been willing scapegoats, and they were sent on their way with a Medal of Freedom, freedom from prosecution, or other "rewards" for their kicked-dog loyalty. Bush is not prejudice in this regard either; even if you are a complete failure or totally destructive and disastrous you can be promoted (or further your career otherwise), financially rewarded, awarded, and sheltered beyond the reach of the law...so far anyway... Anything goes as long as you exhibit your loyalty as a consistent Yea-sayer, and an occasional scapegoat.

Libby was the last straw, because it was an act of over-riding the Judicial Branch - it was so obviously unequal, self-serving "justice." And the Republicans have the nerve to balk about "activist judges" and be mute now! That happened the same week the Executive Branch refused to recognize Congress' subpoenas.

America, WAKE UP! We have a Rogue Branch of Government on our hands!

It's not "us against them" anymore, it's "us against HIM" (or those two). I have certainly been no fan of all the ridiculous, tiring, partisan-crap but this is not even a matter of party, far from it. If we can't all come together for the sake of what is constitutionally correct, then we have nothing left to come together on. The bottom line is that I don't care exactly who it is that's violating, rewriting and dismembering our Constitution currently; I want it to stop, and I don't want anybody to do it ever again! It doesn't matter who you allow to power-grab & abuse, it would get to just about anyone and damage everyone. Imagine if your candidates' "arch enemy" got into office and had this kind of dictator-like power. If that bothers you, then you should also consider protecting your candidate from potential corruption by removing the temptation. We are all only human after all. Aside from all the other temptations (campaign funds, etc...), the only difference between our representatives and ourselves, is that they all swore an oath to protect the Constitution and we are only assumed we would do the same (even though it's technically our duty).

Calling all PATRIOTS for DUTY! IMPEACH THEM NOW!!!
Join over a million Americans; sign the petition that will deliver your message of impeachment on July 23rd.

JFK Threat a Farce

I knew it was a farce the moment I heard it reported that it was an FBI infiltrator that "busted" the plan. It has happened all too often; and I'm betting that, as usual, there will soon be reports of how the infiltrators were the ones that actually instigated or initiated the plan in the first place. It was the same thing with the so-called foiled plan to attack Fort Dix. No real evidence, no real ability to carry out the plan they said to have had, "there was no clear ringleader," and best yet, the arrests began when the suspects went to, "buy assault weapons, which had been supplied and disabled by the FBI." Get real people, these are no geniuses with a serious plan - they were first identified because they sent a a jihadist training DVD to a local store to be copied! It wasn't until a full year had passed after that, that they even became as UNable as they were by the time they were arrested.

In this more recent assertion that there was another attack thwarted, there is plenty of evidence that they were equally unable of carrying this "plot" to fruition...and much more to the story...

In this article about the alleged plot, JFK Plot Foiled - and Flawed, they seem to share my skepticism as to whether all these "thwarted attacks" are legitimate:

"All the plots were apparently closely monitored by intelligence agencies, almost from their inception, and all were stopped long before they were capable of implementing them. In many cases, the suspects are alleged to have expressed an intention to attack targets, but lacked the financing, training and means to do so."
Of course, you have to go to a foreign newspaper to get this kind of info...

Then again, we are lucky enough to have a few diligent bloggers that can connect the dots! Check out the this post that pulls this farce together with much more nefarious intent than was presented to the public:
by Cannonfire

A CIA False Flag Operation?

Scary Connection between Libby and Edmonds

What do Scooter Libby and Sibel Edmonds have in common? Not much; one's a criminal the other is not, one is a liar and the other is not. One is a patriot and the other is NOT. What they DO have in common is this: they both may have their cases dismissed because they both have the right to recuse their common judge, Judge Reggie Walton, who has been protecting government officials by gagging Edmonds and locking up Libby. According to this article by Raw Story, in March of 2006, Edmonds filed a motion for Judge Walton's recusal from her case (pending at that time) on the basis that he is guilty of having a "secrecy bias." Apparently he redacted his financial disclosure, and that is in violation of the "Ethics in Government Act."

As far as Libby's trial goes, I think that if there is any REAL grounds for an appeal, it may lay within Judge Walton's resume. It's in brief at the end of Edmonds' release for the recusal movement, as follows:

"Judge Reggie Walton was nominated to his position as a United States District Court of Columbia Judge in October 2001 by President George W. Bush. He served as President George H. W. Bush’s Associate Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy in the Executive Office of the President and as President Bush’s Senior White House advisor for Crime."

I'd say that having been Bush's WH advisor, and protecting the very same administration from prosecution, that could be conflictive. I don't think that Libby's attorneys wouldn't be stupid enough to go this route, but who knows, they have been screaming "scapegoat" at the top of their lungs...does this mean that Libby may roll on those he has lied for? We'll see. If not, I think he has a case based on the very same basis that Edmonds took in 2006 - a judge with a secrecy bias cannot be making rulings on whether or not Libby was lying, especially in a case that surrounds the leaking of top secret information! Don't get me wrong, that treasonous liar should ROT for all that he did. I think Bush will let it ride until the appeal. fails, or he is near leaving office before he pardons Libby.

Unfortunately for Edmonds, Judge Walton was promoted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA court) last month. So I imagine she will have to fight his participation again in the future, IF her request for Chairman Waxman to hold an open hearing is successful. Vist my post, Let the Whistleblower Speak! for more information, and how to contact Waxman to get the hearing we deserve on this incredibly important matter.

What I find extra incredible is the public support for pardoning Libby. Those people are just as treasonous as Libby! Aiding a treasonous criminal. Why would any red-blooded American want this guy to get-off free on this? He had his chance to give up others involved, and he had a chance to bargain I'm sure. Let him appeal, let him have his case retried, or better yet, let the investigation begin again! When are Americans going to finally stand up for each other? When are patriots going to be treated like heroes again?