AA Exposes Bush's 'Big Lie': Flight 11 DID NOT FLY on 911!

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

American Airlines is the source for information that AA Flights 11 (North Tower) and 77 (Pentagon) did not fly on 911. If neither flew on 911, the Bush 'theory' is a lie.

If the Bush 'theory' is a lie, there remains only one explanation: 911 was an inside job given a green-light by Bush himself. Moreover --only Pentagon employees were autopsied as a result of Flight 77 crashing the Pentagon.

There are NO names of passengers on the list, which is, in fact, the only admissible evidence to survive Bush's cover up and his obvious and felonious destruction of evidence (wreckage) at the Pentagon.

These "holes" are fatal to the Bush government's crumbling cover up! Conan Doyle, the brilliant creator of the character Sherlock Holmes, said:

"When you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains however implausible must be the truth!" 

Bush's official conspiracy theory of 911 is not only impossible, it is absurd and insulting to intelligent people!

The Bush Conspiracy Theory is impossible; That's why we know it is a lie!  

There is, then, probable cause to indict Bush and his co-conspirators for the crimes of mass murder and high treason. See: U. S. Codes, Title 18, Section 2441. That includes every lying statement made by Bush.

WikiScanner discovered that it was American Airlines which changed their Wikipedia entry to state that Flights 11 and 77 did not fly on 9/11. If these flights did not fly or did not exist, then Bush's "official conspiracy theory" must be discarded. It is a lie! The original entry was as follows:

Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack: American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and American Airlines Flight 11 (a Boeing 767).

New entry [as of the date of this article] is as follows and includes the bolded text below:

Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack: Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and Flight 11 (a Boeing 767).

Although these flights were daily departures before and a month after September 11, 2001. Neither flight 11 nor 77 were scheduled on September 11, 2001. The records kept by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (www.bts.gov/gis/) do not list either flight that day.

--Wikipedia

To make the point: Wikipedia is NOT the source for these changes. The original source is American Airlines by making changes to Wikipedia. The 'story' is not about Wiki. The story is about a fact that is consistent with the observed facts as follows:

1. no wreckage traceable to any airliner was ever recovered at the Pentagon
2. That the flight (77) was not scheduled
3. no airliner wreckage of any type nor any wreckage traceable to any flight was ever found or revealed by Bushco.

Instead, Bushco ordered the felony destruction of evidence i.e, wreckage that most certainly would have been verified and traced --not to an airliner but to a U.S. Global Hawk!

The ONLY turbo fan that was found and documented is not traceable to any airliner. It is, in fact, about 1/3 the diameter of two much larger turbo-fans that would have been recovered had Flt 77 struckt the Pentagon. It seems to me that Bush's felony destruction of evidence is evidence in itself that it was not an airliner that struck the Pentagon.

What had Bush to fear from airliner wreckage? Surely --the verified presence of debris traceable to an airliner would have supported Bush's version of events. Instead --Bush behaved like the criminal that he is and remains, i.e, he ordered the destruction of the evidence. That's a felony! 

The story is about how corrections to the official story originated with and from inside AA. The story is about the fact that the evidence that Flights 11 and 77 were not flying on 911 comes from American Airlines itself. Clearly --airliner personnel were trying to set the record straight. 

Just as no wreckage traceable to any 757 was ever recovered from the Pentagon, there is, likewise, no indisputable or official record that the flight --mothballed for some six months --was ever put back into service. If it had been, the burden of proof is still on Bushco and his league of liars to prove their story. 

SHOW ME THE WRECKAGE!! 

According to a Freedom of Information Act reply from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), the last known pre-9/11 flights for three of the four aircraft involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 took place in December, 2000, nine months before the attacks, while no pre-9/11 final flight information was provided for American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA).

However, a discovered searchable online BTS database produces the following search results for three of the four 9/11 aircraft on September 10, 2001:

AA 11 departs San Francisco (SFO): AA 09/10/2001 0198 (flight number) N334AA (tail number) BOS (destination) 22:04 (wheels-off time)

UA 175 departs San Francisco (SFO): UA 09/10/2001 0170 (flight number) N612UA (tail number) BOS (destination) 13:44 (wheels-off time)

UA 93 departs San Francisco (SFO): UA 09/10/2001 0078 (flight number) N591UA (tail number) EWR (destination) 23:15 (wheels-off time)
--911 Blogger, UPDATE: U.S. BTS FOIA Records For 9/11 Planes Differ From BTS Online Database [The records were obtained by Adrian Monaghan]

The question is raised: how do we know who made the changes to Wiki? Everyone logged on to the internet does so from an IP address. In this case, the IP is that of American Airlines. It's traceable.

My own WHOIS lookup as well as my Google search of the IP address proves conclusively that the change originated from American Airlines itself. That is consistent with the fact that no wreckage traceable to any 757 was ever recovered. If it had been, you can bet that the Bush administration would have put every scrap on parade. They didn't!

Therefore, the Bush theory of 911 is a deliberate lie.

My look up returned the following:

WHOIS - 144.9.8.21

Location: United States [City: Ft. Worth, Texas

OrgName: American Airlines Incorporated OrgID: AMERIC-112 Address: P.O.Box 619616 Address: MD 5308 City: DFW Airport StateProv: TX PostalCode: 75261 Country: US NetRange: 144.9.0.0 - 144.9.255.255 CIDR: 144.9.0.0/16 NetName: AANET NetHandle: NET-144-9-0-0-1 Parent: NET-144-0-0-0-0 NetType: Direct Assignment NameServer: DNS-P1.SABRE.COM NameServer: DNS-P2.SABRE.COM NameServer: DNS-P3.SABRE.COM NameServer: DNS-P4.SABRE.COM Comment: RegDate: 1990-10-31 Updated: 2002-06-27 RTechHandle: OG60-ARIN RTechName: Gelbrich, Orf RTechPhone: +1-817-931-3145 RTechEmail: ************@aa.com OrgTechHandle: ZW72-ARIN OrgTechName: WARIS, ZISHAN OrgTechPhone: +1-817-967-1242 OrgTechEmail: ************@aa.com # ARIN WHOIS database, last updated 2008-06-29 19:10 # Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's WHOIS database.

In previous articles, I pointed out the fact that mere scraps that were found lying around on the Pentagon lawn were quickly gathered up by white shirted geeks. It was the only wreckage of any kind found on the Pentagon lawn. It included only one engine turbo-fan! But two would have been found had Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. The fan that was located and photographed on the lawn was one-third the diameter of two much larger compressor rotors that would have been left behind had a 757, indeed, ANY airliner crashed the Pentagon.

Last time I checked, the GOP had not managed to repeal the laws of physics, in this case, the law of the conservation of matter and energy. Simply, the wreckage found at the Pentagon when gathered would have weighed several tons; in other words, it would have weighed as much as a 757 minus passengers and fuel. Instead --the only wreckage gathered was carted off on the shoulders of four or five white-shirted, skinny geeks! Several tons? I don't think so.

Bottom line: NO WRECKAGE TRACEABLE TO A 757 was EVER found at the Pentagon. I do not believe that the laws of the conservation of matter and energy [See: conservation of matter and energy, M.I.T.] were repealed by Bush however much he might have wanted to do so.

SHOW ME THE WRECKAGE and TRACE IT TO A 757!!

We can expect a gang of crooks and liars to cover up their own misdeeds but to cover-up the work of an 'alleged' gang of terrorists only makes them look guilty. It makes them look guilty because the only remaining alternative is that Bushco is motivated to destroy evidence. Only those who are guilty of crimes are thus motivated. In this case, only Bushco is motivated to 1) lie about 911 2) order the destruction of evidence as he, in fact, did with respect to the Pentagon and the towers in New York; 3) try to intimidate those questioning the official lie by branding them traitors and/or subversives.

One of Many Fatal Holes in the Bush Official Conspiracy Theory

The many lies (many referenced in previous EC articles; see links below) are probable cause to begin a Federal Grand Jury investigation of George W. Bush's role in 911. Bush should be compelled by subpoena and Federal Marshals to testify under oath before an independent Federal Grand Jury. The AA revelations demand it!

911 as we have been told did not happen.

Bushco's 'official conspiracies theory' of 911 is full of holes. Flights 11 and 77 are essential ingredients in the "official conspiracy theory" of 911. That AA claims that neither 11 nor 77 were in the air that day sinks Bush's theory. Clearly --the official theory is a lie, an intentional cover-up. Cover-ups imply guilt! Otherwise --what is there to cover up? The official lie goes like this:

At 8:20, Flight 11 stopped transmitting its transponder signal, and veered northward and departed dramatically from the westward heading of its planned route. The controllers concluded that the plane had probably been hijacked. 4 5 At 8:24, the following transmission was reportedly received from Flight 11: We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay .. we are returning to the airport

..Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet. Nobody move please we are going back to the airport .. don't try to make any stupid moves. 6
Neither of the pilots pressed the distress call button. At 8:28 controllers reportedly watched the plane make a 100-degree turn toward the south. 7 Presumably, Flight 11 continued south along the Hudson River until it reached the World Trade Center, though documentation of this is sparse given the lack of public information.
According to NORAD's September 18 timeline, the FAA did not notify NORAD of the signs that Flight 11 was hijacked until 8:40, 25 minutes after the first signs of trouble. 8 

--Flight 11, The First Jet Commandeered on September 11th, 911 Research

Simply: if AA Flight 11 was not in the air, it could not have struck the towers; ergo: the Bush theory is false!

The house of cards collapses.

Assertions that Flight 11 struck the North Tower that are utterly baseless! If neither Flight 11 mor 77 was in the air that day, the Bush administration's version of events must be utterly discarded.

If flights 11 or 77 did not fly on 911, officialdom must come up with another explanation to explain the the events of 911.

No wreckage traceable to a 757 was ever found at the Pentagon.

One would not expect to find wreckage of a flight never flown. What is significant with respect to the changes to Wiki, with respect to BTS/NTSB records is that the burden of proof is now placed upon Bushco to prove its theory. Bush et al should be compelled to prove the official theory --or face charges resulting from the probable cause that Bush himself and high ranking members of his administration participated in the crimes of mass murder and high treason!

Photos of an engine rotor appear to depict an engine used in the Global Hawk, a payload carrying missile that was, according to Britain's International Television News, flown from the US to Australia completely by remote control. "A robot plane has made aviation history by becoming the first unmanned aircraft to fly across the Pacific Ocean." 

Britain's ITN continued:

"The Global Hawk, a jet-powered aircraft with a wingspan equivalent to a Boeing 737, flew from Edwards Air Force Base in California and landed late on Monday at the Royal Australian Air Force base at Edinburgh, in South Australia state... It flies along a pre-programmed flight path, but a pilot monitors the aircraft during its flight via a sensor suite which provides infra-red and visual images."

ITN quoted Australian Global Hawk manager Rod Smith: "The aircraft essentially flies itself, right from takeoff, right through to landing, and even taxiing off the runway."

"The Missile that Struck this Building" --Don Rumsfeld

The Global Hawk is a much better candidate for what Rumsfeld called '...the missile that struck this building' than a 757. Here's what you need to know about the Pentagon.

• Only minutes after the strike, [see pic above] there is no sign of an airliner at all!!
• No wreckage traceable to a 757 was ever recovered.
• Only ONE engine rotor was recovered to be seen in photo! This rotor is about one third the diameter of a 757 rotor, i.e about the size of a U.S. Global Hawk rotor and can be traced to a U.S. Global Hawk.
• A 757 has two rotors, each of which are nearly three times the size of the SINGLE rotor located at the Pentagon. Again --only one rotor was found in Pentagon debris.
• Engine rotors are made of a Steel/Titanium alloy to withstand high temps inside jet engines and would have been found had they been there.
• Flight 77 could not and did not crash into the Pentagon. That may be because Flt 77 did not fly on 911. According to airline records, Flight 77 had been mothballed and had not flown for some 6 months prior to 911.

No Arabs Were on Board 77

There are no Arabs on the only Pentagon 'evidence' that is admissible in court: the 'Official Autopsy Report' of Pentagon victims. If no Arabs were on board Flight 77, Bush's theory must be trashed! There is not only no evidence to support the conspiracy theory that Arab terrorists hijacked 77. There is every reason to believe that none ever got on board.

The autopsy report was released to Dr. Olmsted in response to his FOIA request. In a 'neat' cover-up, a 911 memorial lists all victims of whatever it was that crashed into the Pentagon. At the same time, 77 victims were said to have been buried at Arlington National Cemetery. All are Pentagon employees! Where, then, are the passengers buried? I would be very surprised to learn that there were passengers on a flight that cannot be proven to have existed.

Whatever crashed into the Pentagon was described by a witnesses as looking like a "hump-backed whale". Rumsfeld himself called it a missile: Below: a US Global Hawk painted to look like an AA airliner. It is both a 'missile' and it also has a hump back! It 'fills the bill'.

The photo below does not purport to be the craft that would ultimately crash into the Pentagon. It merely demonstrates how easily such a 'paint job' could dupe those who are 1) not experts on aircraft 2) saw it only for a second or less as it scooted across the Pentagon lawn as NO 757 could possibly have done 3) were, in any case, caught off guard.


Recognizing lies for what they are is a part of the process of growing up! America, it is time to grow up! It is time to confront this heinous pack of lies! It is time to insist that the Obama administration begin a REAL investigation of 911.

It is time to insist that a Federal Grand Jury investigate every count of high treason, mass murder and domestic terrorism that was perpetrated upon the people of the U.S. by the Bush administration, his collaborators in the Pentagon, K-Street, the Congress and the leadership of the Republican party, Marvin Bush's 'Securacom', Larry Silverstein who ordered WTC 7 be 'pulled', General Myers, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and, of course, George W. Bush who was, at the time, the 'Commander-in-Chief' and ultimately responsible for the orders given the US military to 'stand down'.

By Donald Rumsfeld's own admission, he was unaware of any threats to the Pentagon -- the building where he was located during the September 11th attacks -- until an aircraft crashed into the side of it, and he ran out "into the smoke" to see if it might be a "A bomb? I had no idea." (ABC News This Week, Interview 9/16/01).

Well, that's a pretty tall tale by any standard. The New York Times reported that by 8:13am, the FAA was aware of the first hijacking out of Boston. The Pentagon explosion, which Donald Rumsfeld claimed he had "no idea," did not occur until approximately 9:37am, nearly an hour and a half later, this after two of the tallest buildings in the world were devastated. Note that a plane hijacked out of Boston can reach Washington D.C. as easily as it can reach New York City.

It was widely reported that Pentagon personnel were indeed aware of the threats to their security, and they took security measures on that morning. But not the "Secretary of Defense." Why should the man charged with defending the United States of America concern himself with hijacked aircraft?

There is a set of procedures for responding to hijackings. In particular, these procedures were changed on June 1, 2001 while Rumsfeld was in power as our Secretary of Defense, in a document called: "CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTRUCTION, J-3 CJCSI 3610.01A"

The video asks: "Was 911 a Conspiracy?" That is not the question. Even Bushco claims that it was a conspiracy --a conspiracy of 19 Arab Hijackers who could not possibly have pulled it off. It's a stupid theory; without the shock and awe campaign, no one would have believed it.

The questions, rather, are which conspiracy and who were the conspirators? It was Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's character Sherlock Holmes who said that when you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains however improbable MUST be the truth!

There has been a spate of fallacious comments of the form: "...uh...what happened to the passengers, dude?". A few points:

1. the 'question' is, in fact, an implied statement and assumes that there were flights! It assumes there were passengers! If there were --in fact --passengers one would have expected to have found their names on the official autopsy report. One would have expected to find in the public records the time and location of their burials.
2. But --alas --there are NO Arab names whatsoever on the ONLY official/admissible scrap of evidence to have survived the Bush cover-up of 911! That would be the official autopsy report! There is simply no evidence of any passengers, no evidence that any flight alleged by Bush to have crashed in either NY or the Pentagon flew at all on that fateful day! In a court, it would be said that any statement with respect to 'passengers' that 'it assumes facts NOT in evidence'!
3. Absence of evidence is not evidence! It is certainly not evidence in support of anything, let alone Bush's idiotic, fallacious and pernicious lie(s)! The 'absence of bodies' is not evidence of a crash of any sort. Only the presence of bodies traceable to the alleged flights would have been evidence in support of Bush. Alas --there were none! Ergo: Bush lied! The Bush 'theory' is bunk and bullshit!

The only available evidence, moreover, disproves the Bushco conspiracy theory of 911. There is no evidence whatsoever that there were --at any time --any Arabs of any sort (terrorist or otherwise) on board Flight 77, a flight for which there is no evidence whatsoever that it was even in the air.

Even the Washington Post is on record reporting that Hani Hanjour could not have been on board; he did NOT have a ticket. Skinny Hanjour is said to have been very slight, perhaps less than a hundred pounds. Are we to believe he over-powered people at the gate? In any case, there is simply no evidence of that, nor was it reported, nor is it credible.

Also --among the flight information released to an professional pilots association NTSB data that proves that the cockpit door was NEVER opened during the flight. Are we to believe that Hanjour managed to walk through a closed door into the cockpit? Was he sooo skinny he was able to slide under a closed cockpit door. Really! The Bush theory is not merely impossible, it's increasingly absurd, stupid and amateurish. Anyone duped by this bullshit should be ashamed of themselves.

The AFIP suggest these numbers; 189 killed, 125 worked at the Pentagon and 64 were "passengers" on the plane. The AA list only had 56 and the list just obtained has 58. They did not explain how they were able to tell "victims" bodies from "hijacker" bodies. In fact, from the beginning NO explanation has been given for the extra five suggested in news reports except that the FBI showed us the pictures to make up the difference, and that makes it so.

Now, being the trusting sort, I figured that the government would want to quickly dispel any rumors so we could get on with the chore of kicking Osama/Sadaam's butt (weren't these originally two different people?). It seemed simple to me. . .produce the names of all the bodies identified by the AFIP and compare it with the publicized list of passengers. So, I sent a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the AFIP and asked for an expedited response, because we were getting ready to send our boys to war on the pretext that Osama/Saddam had done the deed. Fourteen months later, a few US soldiers dead, many Iraqi civilians pushing up daisies, and I finally get the list. Believe me that they weren't a bit happy to give it up, and I really have no idea why they choose now to release it.

foia-10003.jpg

No Arabs wound up on the morgue slab; however, three ADDITIONAL people not listed by American Airlines sneaked in. I have seen no explanation for these extras. Indeed, American had the opportunity to "revise" their original list, but they have not responded. The new names are: Robert Ploger, Zandra Ploger, and Sandra Teague. The AFIP claims that the only "passenger" body that they were not able to identify is the toddler, Dana Falkenberg, whose parents and young sister are on the list of those identified. The satanic masterminds behind this caper may be feeling pretty smug about the perfect crime, but they have left a raft of clues tying these unfortunates together.

--Thomas R. Olmsted, M.D., Autopsy: No Arabs on Flight 77 

Worth repeating and in summary:

...the last known pre-9/11 flights for three of the four aircraft involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 took place in December, 2000, nine months before the attacks.

I don't wish to belabor the point but it must be made clear that unaccounted for passengers is among the biggest holes in Bush's cover story; it is Bush's big, treasonous lie.

If Bush cannot explain the absence of airliner wreckage or the missing passengers, then his official theory must be discounted. It was Conan Doyle's character, Sherlock Holmes, who said: "When you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains, however implausible, must be the truth!" But, of course, finding, learning, revealing the truth has never been the Bushco agenda. Seizing unjustifiable war powers was, I am sure, always on his agenda which always included oil!

Those who assert must prove! 

The burden of proof is on anyone believing and/or asserting that the alleged flights existed. A mass movement of Americans to include members of Congress should have insisted insisted that a Federal Prosecutor put Bush on the witness stand in front of a federal grand jury where the following question would be put to him: 'what was the fate of the passengers on flights 77 and 11?'

It would be very interesting to learn how he might escape the experience without being indicted for:

1. PERJURY
2. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
3. MASS MURDER

Concerning possible charges of 'high treason' against Bush: was it not Bush who declared that we were at war? Was it not Bush and his shills who insisted that the US attack, invade and occupy Iraq in response to an 'attack' upon the US? Have not Bush partisans insisted, from the 'gitgo' that the U.S. attack, invasion and occupation of Iraq was part and parcel of the US 'war on terrorism'? That being the case, Bush's complicity in the events of 911 are most certainly acts of betrayal against a sovereign in a time of war and, therefore, high treason! 

Among a growing number of links back to this article is this excellent expose of the Flight 77 fraud:

According to the official story, AA Flight 77, a Boeing 757, took off from Dulles Airport in northern Virginia at 8:10 a.m. bound for Los Angeles, with between 50 and 58 passengers. It flew west for about 45 minutes, making a curious detour to the north, west and south, before turning around and flying for another 45 minutes back to Washington. Why hijackers would allow a jet which they planned to crash into a target in Washington to fly for 45 minutes away from its target is not explained. Why did they not commandeer the plane ten minutes after takeoff when the plane was only ten minutes flying time from its intended target? The official story ignores this question, as it does all other questions.

As reported by the New York Times (International Herald Tribune, 2001-10-17, p.8), as AA 77 approached the Pentagon it executed a 270-degree 7,000-foot descent over Washington while flying at 500 mph. It approached the Pentagon on a horizontal trajectory so low that it clipped the power lines across the street then (so the story goes) it smashed into an outer wall of the Pentagon.

We were told (and, of course, expected to believe without question) that this maneuver was executed by an Arab pilot, Hani Hanjour, who in August 2001 was judged by the chief flight instructor at Bowie's Maryland Freeway Airport as not having the piloting skills required to fly a Cessna 172 solo. (Is there something fishy here?)

In contrast to the attention given to the collapse of the Twin Towers, the attack on the Pentagon received little attention until in February 2002 a French website (by Thierry Meyssan) appeared which reproduced images obtained from U.S. Army websites: Hunt the Boeing! These images cast doubt upon the official story that the Pentagon was hit by a Boeing 757 jetliner. For example, here is a picture of the Pentagon crash site taken about two hours after the impact, with the fire still burning. Can you see any remains of the approximately 100 tons of metal (including engines, wings, and tail section) which makes up a Boeing 757? .....

--Pentagon Official Story Hoax

The FBI doesn't believe the 'official conspiracy theory' of 911. Why should you?

The FBI has admitted, officially, that it cannot find any 'evidence' or documentation to support popular myths that some four airliners were hijacked by terrorists and used as weapons on 911. Moreover, the FBI itself admits that "... no records would have been generated responsive to plaintiffs request for documents."

In other words, even the FBI concedes that there is no admissible, no official evidence to support Bush's lies about 911. Their investigation, says the FBI, was based upon the never questioned assumption that the said flights had been hijacked. The key word in the FBI statement is: ASSUMPTION. The FBI is overly polite. 'Assumption' by Bushco is unacceptable! But a better description of Bush and company is 'bald-faced lie' purpose of which was two-fold: 1) obstruct justice 2) protect the guilty and prevent their prosecution for the crimes of high treason and mass murder!

The Co-chairs of the 911 Commission don't believe the official theory; why should you?

Related: Terrorism is Worse Under GOP Regimes

---

---

Liars, Crooks and Idiots: Who Wants Obama to Fail and Why

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

In the wake of Bush's utter failures, lies, and crimes, the left-wing, by rights, should be tucking tail and seeking cover! Not so --Rush Limbaugh, to be expected of a crooked idiot, has said he hopes Obama fails. Others have picked up the mantra!

It has been my experience in life, journalism and politics that two things among all others makes one miserable: 1) just wanting to stay alive, and 2) wishing failure or hardship upon someone else upon one's on evil, vile motives. My response: the GOP does not deserve to survive as a party, and, secondly, the GOP rose upon the backs of all those people for whom the GOP wished and, in fact, inflicted hardships.

The GOP shares this much with Nazis and other parties totalitarian inclined: the GOP cannot tell the truth that it does not represent the electorate but a shrinking elite which amounts --last time I checked --to just 1 percent of the entire population and shrinking. They make up the rest by lying about their real intentions. Even then, they are a minority of about 30 to 40 percent hardcore who share two characteristics:

• They are unintelligent and/or uninformed of the fact that the GOP does not really represent them, lies to them and takes their support for granted!
• This group is most certainly the 30 percent of any population referred to by Carl Jung who identified another distinguishing characteristic of them: their utter psychopathy

This is a 'class' of wannabes obvious for their lack of empathy, their disregard for every other group --the poor, the black, the Hispanic, anyone not a member of a country club or dubious or occultist fraternity! This group cheered the Bush attack on Iraq though Iraq had nothing to do with 911 and informed intelligent folk knew this to be the case at the time. Another sub-set was just a part of the fraud. This sub-set knew it was a fraud and supported it anyway. Both groups stayed onboard the Bush bandwagon even when it was clear that there were no WMD to be found. This group's support of Bush persisted despite the fact that it had been proven that not only were the memos dodgy, Bushco committed high treason by outing an agent of the US in the performance of her duty: Valerie Plame. Both facts meant nothing to this group of 'hard core' traitors!

A Man Who Does Not Know the Truth is Just an Idiot!

Bertolt Brecht said: 'A man who does not know the truth is just an idiot but a man who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a crook! Moderates were and remain stupid --falling for Bush's transparent lies. They are just idiots! 'He meant well', they say! But Bush qualifies for 'crookhood'! He did not mean well. He knew he was lying and he did so upon the very worst motives: he wished to enrich what he called his 'base'. They would engineer the commission of atrocities, war crimes and aggressions to satisfy their appetites. Moderates will claim that 'Bush believed what he did was right'. Utter nonsense! Bush did not and does care what is right. Bush's motives were as evil as his actions.

In the past, there were an albeit dwindling number of Republicans who may have been wrong but wrong in 'good faith'. Since the rise of Ronald Reagan, this group has become as scarce as hen's teeth! A growing number of GOP today are wrong and, if proven wrong, don't care! Being right means nothing! Winning is everything! This group will lie --knowing that it is a lie --if it gets them votes.

'Corporate fat cats' are a sub-set of this group! Nothing said by a corporation can be believed; they are 'artificial people' to whom laws and morality do not apply. An individual held responsible for the disaster at Bhopal, for example, might have been found guilty and sentenced for mass murder. Dow et al got only a slap on the wrist. A corporation is a 'legal abstraction', a mere piece of paper with a seal on it! The principles of ethics and morality mean nothing to them.

Was Mencken Right When He Said Most Americans Were 'Idiots'?

There remains a rapidly vanishing 'left wing' including what is derisively called the 'ideologically pure left'! The opposition of this ideological left vs the 'leave no crime uncommitted' right wing creates someone right of center in a yawning gulf of the near non-political 'un-washed' who failed to grasp the legal significance of Bush v Gore, has but a hazy notion of 'habeas corpus', and whose political views are an unholy amalgam of CNN and FOX! H.L. Mencken believed the people --the vast majority of Americans --to be 'idiots'!

It is fashionable to say that Bush did not fail. This position is not without merit. Certainly --like Reagan before him --he succeeded admirably in transferring vast amounts of wealth upward to the near infinitesimal 'base' which alone benefited. Among members of this group, Bush is a hero!

I consider Bush to have been a traitor to the US Constitution and the people. That he is celebrated by this ever shrinking group tells me that they have no allegiance to the Constitution, the principles of Democracy, the rule of law! The group becomes a power apart, a new oligopoly for whom you slave! If you believe otherwise, you have been lied to. Believe it, and remain deluded! If you are but a mere millionaire, you are NOT of this group and probably never will be! The Bush family's rise to prominence among this group, you can be sure, was an on-going Faustian bargain.

Bush Jr told us that terrorists 'attacked us' because 'they jest hate freedom'', but Bush should have added: 'I hate you because you are free but you will not be for long.' Moderates look at Bush's torture policy, and try to justify it ex post facto. They desperately seek an end to justify the torture means! The end, rather, is nothing less than the roll back of the Bill of Rights, the establishment of a right wing dictatorship. The means by which this is achieved are endless wars based on lies; the means are getting rid of the Clinton surpluses, getting rid of the economy, getting rid of the American standard of living. The 'end' is the more Authoritarian, perhaps totalitarian society!

The Result of Fascism/Nazism: A Nation of Slaves and Elites

This brings us to the ideological underpinnings of the GOP. A clue be found among what Bush himself called his 'base', specifically the richest one percent of the nation. How do they rationalize their positions of privilege and entitlement? A careful study --if it were possible --might reveal a panoply of claptrap from half-baked Hegel/Nietzche where the 'superman' meets the 'absolute state'. If one believes the state absolute, it is but a quantum leap to eugenics, concentration camps, genocide! It is but a quantum leap to dictatorship and aggressive wars!

The American industrialists who supported and who joined I.G. Farben, Fritz Thysen in bankrolling Hitler did so because they agreed with Hitler's agenda for Germany and the world. Many of these companies endorsed George W. Bush for same or similar reasons. Hitler would 'out-source' the murder of jews and might have seized the oil fields of the Middle East had he directed Rommel to forget about North Africa and attack east of the Suez.

Like Nixon, George Bush was deeply involved with supporting the Nazis in the Republican's closet. In fact, support for the Nazis was a Bush family tradition which goes back more than six decades and, once again, to Allen Dulles.

Loftus and Aarons write: "The real story of George Bush starts well before he launched his own career. It goes back to the 1920s, when the Dulles brothers and the other pirates of Wall Street were making their deals with the Nazis.

. . .

THE BUSH-DULLES-NAZI CONNECTION

"George Bush's problems were inherited from his namesake and maternal grandfather, George Herbert 'Bert' Walker, a native of St. Louis, who founded the banking and investment firm of G. H. Walker and Company in 1900. Later the company shifted from St. Louis to the prestigious address of 1 Wall Street.

"Walker was one of Hitler's most powerful financial supporters in the United States. The relationship went all the way back to 1924, when Fritz Thyssen, the German industrialist, was financing Hitler's infant Nazi party.

...

Randy Davis, Nazis in the attic

The "America First" movement in the US prominently included Charles Lindbergh but was, in fact, the very face of American 'fascism'. Lindbergh was a Nazi sympathizer. It must not be forgotten that Henry Ford's portrait occupied a place of 'honor' in Hitler's new Chancellery. Bush's grandfather led a failed coup attempt to unseat FDR. It was an act of treason!

A large and wealthy segment of the US did not wish a war with Hitler. Those who supported Hitler included William Randolph Hearst, Andrew Mellon and Irenee du Pont, a Hitler devotee who advocated a race of supermen. Major US companies had ties to Hitler. They aided and abetted the rise of the Third Reich. They included Alcoa, Standard Oil of New Jersey, Du Pont, General Motors, Ford Motor Company, and many, many more.

WASHINGTON - After 60 years of inattention and even denial by the U.S. media, newly-uncovered government documents in The National Archives and Library of Congress reveal that Prescott Bush, the grandfather of President George W. Bush, served as a business partner of and U.S. banking perative for the financial architect of the Nazi war machine from 1926 until 1942, when Congress took aggressive action against Bush and his 'enemy national' partners.

"The documents also show that Bush and his colleagues, according to reports from the U.S. Department of the Treasury and FBI, tried to conceal their financial alliance with German industrialist Fritz Thyssen, a steel and coal baron who, beginning in the mid-1920s, personally funded Adolf Hitler's rise to power by the subversion of democratic principle and German law.

"Furthermore, the declassified records demonstrate that Bush and his associates, who included E. Roland Harriman, younger brother of American icon W. Averell Harriman, and George Herbert Walker, President Bush's maternal great-grandfather, continued their dealings with the German industrial baron for nearly eight months after the U.S. entered the war.

--Nazi-Link Confirmed, John Buchanan, New Hampshire Gazette, Oct. 10, 2003

I have not been able to find on the net the famous picture of American Nazis at a funeral of German Hindenburg disaster victims. In procession by the caskets, they are all giving the departed the famous Nazi salute.

"Fascism is on the march today in America. Millionaires are marching to the tune. It will come in this country unless a strong defense is set up by all liberal and progressive forces... A clique of U.S. industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist state to supplant our democratic government, and is working closely with the fascist regime in Germany and Italy. Aboard ship a prominent executive of one of America's largest financial corporations told me point blank that if the progressive trend of the Roosevelt administration continued, he would be ready to take definite action to bring fascism to America.

---William Dodd, US Ambassador to Germany, 1938

All in the Fascist Family

Prescott Bush, Bush Jr's grandfather, was made rich by the business he did with Hitler --a trade that continued well after the US had entered the war. The death biz made the Bush family fortune!

After the war, the Nazis changed neither stripes nor swastikas. Many came to the US where they had careers in business or in the government --namely the CIA and the space program. Many of them were rocket scientists including Dr. Werner von Braun --the father of the US Space Program. He was a card carrying Nazi.

Despite being under constant surveillance and enduring relentless attacks on his character, von Braun had nothing but praise for his adopted country. When one person wrote him, suggesting that severe measures be taken with people who opposed national interests, he wrote back, “Years of direct exposure to the Hitler regime, and its excesses, taught me a few unforgettable lessons and made me solidly opposed to any form of government which would deprive man of human dignity.”

...

In private, however, von Braun was willing to talk. When an acquaintance wrote him about the accusations, von Braun replied, “... yes, I was a member of the Nazi party and the SS. I would appreciate it if you would treat this as confidential ... for the sake of NASA.”

A high official at NASA offered his view. “We lied when we brought von Braun over here, and then told him to keep his mouth shut. Can you imagine him holding a press conference to explain why he joined the Nazi Party? That would have been the end of him and the space program. The poor S.O.B., didn‘t have a chance! He just had to stand there and take it. People say von Braun used us, but the truth is ... we used him.“

--The FBI Files of Werner von Braun

Journalist Russ Bellant investigated how the GOP recruited and with help from convicted Nazi war collaborator, Lazlo Pasztor, created a 'network' of ex-Nazis cum Republicans. Pasztor, founding chairman of the Republican Heritage Groups Council was connected with the Hungarian Arrow Cross '... a group that helped liquidate Hungary's Jews'. He served as adviser to Paul Weyrich.

Two months before the November 1988 presidential election, a small newspaper, Washington Jewish Week, disclosed that a coalition for the Bush campaign included a number of outspoken Nazis and anti-Semites. The article prompted six leaders of Bush's coalition to resign.

According to Russ Bellant, Nazi collaborators involved in the Republican Party included:

(1) Radi Slavoff, GOP Heritage Council's executive director, and head of "Bulgarians for Bush." Slavoff was a member of a Bulgarian fascist group, and he put together an event in Washington honoring Holocaust denier, Austin App.

(2) Florian Galdau, director of GOP outreach efforts among Romanians, and head of "Romanians for Bush." Galdau was once an Iron Guard recruiter, and he defended convicted Nazi war criminal Valerian Trifa.

(3) Nicholas Nazarenko, leader of a Cossack GOP ethnic unit. Nazarenko was an ex-Waffen SS officer.

(4) Method Balco, GOP activist. Balco organized yearly memorials for a Nazi puppet regime.

(5) Walter Melianovich, head of the GOP's Byelorussian unit. Melianovich worked closely with many Nazi groups.

(6) Bohdan Fedorak, leader of "Ukranians for Bush." Fedorak headed a Nazi group involved in anti-Jewish wartime pogroms.

The Philadelphia Inquirer ran an article on the Bush team's inclusion of Nazis (David Lee Preston, "Fired Bush backer one of several with possible Nazi links," September 10, 1988.) The newspaper also ran an investigative series on Nazi members of the Bush coalition. The articles confirmed that the Bush team included members listed by Russ Bellant.

Journalist Martin A. Lee, has written for The Nation, Rolling Stone, The San Francisco Chronicle, and other publications. In "The Beast Reawakens," Lee confirms that during both the Reagan and Bush years, the Republican Party's ethnic outreach arm recruited members from the Nazi ©migr© network.

Lee says that the Republican Party's ethnic outreach division had an outspoken hatred of President Jimmy Carter's Office of Special Investigations (OSI), an organization dedicated to tracking down and prosecuting Nazi war collaborators who entered this country illegally. Former Republican Pat Buchanan attacked Carter's OSI after it deported a few suspected Nazi war criminals.

--Carla Binion, Government Investigated Bush Family's Financing Of Hitler

Over sixty years ago the US was plunged into World War II, a war remembered as one in which the US defended "freedom" against the horrors of fascism and Nazism. We must ask ourselves how this period in our history will be remembered in sixty years? Will the US have opposed the Nazi specter abroad only to embrace it at home? Every Bush/GOP victim says we did precisely that!

Near the end of the Cold War, as the Soviet Union was about to self-destruct, Boris Yeltsin made a very revealing comment to the US government. He said, "We are going to do something very terrible to you. We are going to deprive you of an enemy."

What did he mean? The 50-year long Cold War had proved extremely useful for both the Soviet and US elites. The "Soviet threat" justified gigantic military budgets and a world system of US military bases. It legitimized US attacks on popular revolutionary movements in Central America and Indochina and other places too numerous to mention and the installation of US client regimes by the CIA in Iran and Guatemala and elsewhere. The "Soviet threat" gave much-needed cover to repression in the US against militant trade unionists and against the early civil rights movement and the anti-Vietnam war movement. The Soviets, of course, used the "capitalist threat" in similar ways, to justify anti-democratic repression in Hungary and Poland and throughout Eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union itself. If the Cold War had not existed, Soviet and US ruling elites would have had to invent it.

The use of war by ruling elites for social control is hardly new. In a recent article in Le Monde, Philip Golub says, "Indeed, every war has both a foreign and a domestic agenda; Aristotle [writing 2400 years ago] reminds us that a tyrant declares war 'to deny his subjects leisure and to impose on them the constant need for a leader.''

The US has needed a new Cold War to take the place of the Soviet threat for over ten years. Sure, the government tried to pump up Saddam Hussein as "worse than Hitler," but how seriously can you take an enemy which is defeated in a few weeks with fewer than 80 American battle deaths? The government tried to scare us with images of "rogue states" like North Korea, but North Korea is on life support. Not a very credible threat.

--A New Democracy Editorial: 'Is it Realy a War on Terrorms?'

It should surprise no one that the likes of Rush Limbaugh want Obama to fail. Clinton was not impeached because he was crooked or incompetent but because he clearly was not! Clinton was targeted not because he failed but because he succeeded as NO GOP President had succeeded since World War II. The Limbaugh dominated GOP wants Obama to fail not because he might turn out to be a lousy President but a great one! A great Democratic President should, by rights, portend the demise of GOP bait and switch Nazism, stealth fascism, Trojan Horse dictatorships!

---

George McGovern: George W. Bush is Guilty of "numerous impeachable offences" and Dick Cheney is a Chicken Hawk

This is not the first time that McGovern, who lost to Nixon his own bid for the White House, has slammed the Bush administration. In the Washington Post, McGovern charges that the case against Bush is 'far stronger' than the case against Nixon. [See: BBC: McGovern urges Bush's impeachment]

The former US senator from South Dakota had already excoriated Dick Cheney for lying about Bush/GOP tax and budget policies as well as Cheney's "chicken-hawk", arm-chair imperialism.

George McGovern: Cheney is wrong about me, wrong about war

By George S. McGovern, GEORGE S. MCGOVERN, a former US senator from South Dakota, was the Democratic nominee for president in 1972.

April 24, 2007

VICE PRESIDENT Dick Cheney recently attacked my 1972 presidential platform and contended that today's Democratic Party has reverted to the views I advocated in 1972. In a sense, this is a compliment, both to me and the Democratic Party. Cheney intended no such compliment. Instead, he twisted my views and those of my party beyond recognition. The city where the vice president spoke, Chicago, is sometimes dubbed "the Windy City." Cheney converted the chilly wind of Chicago into hot air.

Cheney said that today's Democrats have adopted my platform from the 1972 presidential race and that, in doing so, they will raise taxes. But my platform offered a balanced budget. I proposed nothing new without a carefully defined way of paying for it. By contrast, Cheney and his team have run the national debt to an all-time high.

He also said that the McGovern way is to surrender in Iraq and leave the US exposed to new dangers. The truth is that I oppose the Iraq war, just as I opposed the Vietnam War, because these two conflicts have weakened the US and diminished our standing in the world and our national security.

In the war of my youth, World War II, I volunteered for military service at the age of 19 and flew 35 combat missions, winning the Distinguished Flying Cross as the pilot of a B-24 bomber. By contrast, in the war of his youth, the Vietnam War, Cheney got five deferments and has never seen a day of combat — a record matched by President Bush.

Cheney charged that today's Democrats don't appreciate the terrorist danger when they move to end US involvement in the Iraq war. The fact is that Bush and Cheney misled the public when they implied that Iraq was involved in the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks. That was the work of Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda team. Cheney and Bush blew the effort to trap Bin Laden in Afghanistan by their sluggish and inept response after the 9/11 attacks.

They then foolishly sent US forces into Iraq against the advice and experience of such knowledgeable men as former President George H.W. Bush, his secretary of State, James A. Baker III, and his national security advisor, Brent Scowcroft.

Just as the Bush administration mistakenly asserted Iraq's involvement in the 9/11 attacks, it also falsely contended that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. When former Ambassador Joseph Wilson exploded the myth that Iraq attempted to obtain nuclear materials from Niger, Cheney's top aide and other Bush officials leaked to the media that Wilson's wife was a CIA agent (knowingly revealing the identity of a covert agent is illegal).

In attacking my positions in 1972 as representative of "that old party of the early 1970s," Cheney seems oblivious to the realities of that time. Does he remember that the Democratic Party, with me in the lead, reformed the presidential nomination process to ensure that women, young people and minorities would be represented fairly? The so-called McGovern reform rules are still in effect and, indeed, have been largely copied by the Republicans.

The Democrats' 1972 platform was also in the forefront in pushing for affordable healthcare, full employment with better wages, a stronger environmental and energy effort, support for education at every level and a foreign policy with less confrontation and belligerence and more cooperation and conciliation.

Cheney also still has his eyes closed to the folly of the Vietnam War, in which 58,000 young Americans and more than 2 million Vietnamese died. Vietnam was no threat to the United States.

On one point I do agree with Cheney: Today's Democrats are taking positions on the Iraq war similar to the views I held toward the Vietnam War. But that is all to the good.

The war in Iraq has greatly increased the terrorist danger. There was little or no terrorism, insurgency or civil war in Iraq before Bush and Cheney took us into war there five years ago. Now Iraq has become a breeding ground of terrorism, a bloody insurgency against our troops and a civil war.

Beyond the deaths of more than 3,100 young Americans and an estimated 600,000 Iraqis, we have spent nearly $500 billion on the war, which has dragged on longer than World War II.

The Democrats are right. Let's bring our troops home from this hopeless war.

There is one more point about 1972 for Cheney's consideration. After winning 11 state primaries in a field of 16 contenders, I won the Democratic presidential nomination. I then lost the general election to President Nixon. Indeed, the entrenched incumbent president, with a campaign budget 10 times the size of mine, the power of the White House behind him and a highly negative and unethical campaign, defeated me overwhelmingly. But lest Cheney has forgotten, a few months after the election, investigations by the Senate and an impeachment proceeding in the House forced Nixon to become the only president in American history to resign the presidency in disgrace.

Who was the real loser of '72?

...

We, of course, already know that when Cheney endorses a war, he exempts himself from participation. On second thought, maybe it's wise to keep Cheney off the battlefield — he might end up shooting his comrades rather than the enemy.

On a more serious note, instead of listening to the foolishness of the neoconservative ideologues, the Cheney-Bush team might better heed the words of a real conservative, Edmund Burke: "A conscientious man would be cautious how he dealt in blood."

McGovern, of course, was the anti war movement's last hope. His choice of Tom Eagleton sank his bid for the White House. The GOP had therefore wasted a lot of effort sharpening daggers. But --I suppose they considered it good policy to stay practiced.

Nixon soon ran into problems. In the summer of 1973, under Nixon's orders, the Air Force bombed so-called communist positions in Cambodia. Congress tacked onto an appropriations bill a section cutting off funds for Nixon's illegal operation which clearly violated Cambodian sovereignty. Meanwhile, a federal district judge in Brooklyn issued an injunction to halt the bombing immediately. These events and the emerging revelations that the opposition had broken into the Watergate Buildling to bug Democratic phones touched off major constitutional struggles of lasting political and military implications.

Certainly, Daniel Ellsburg played his role in Nixon's eventual demise. But, regrettably, Nixon resigned before a definitive court opinion or his impeachment and trial could have established inarguable precedent. Even the articles of impeachment deal primarily with the concept of "obstruction" and less with the very substance of Nixon's imperial and imperious regime.

We all know the US was wrong to have been in SE Asia. But we have not established case law to keep us out of similar acts of vainglorious imperialism in the future. Thus --we are stuck with the GOPs half-baked, sophomoric dreams of US empire.

Bin Laden, Taliban, 911, Terrorism,

---

Kucinich Throws Down the Gauntlet, Moves to Impeach Dick Cheney

Dennis Kucinich Takes House Floor, Moves to Impeach Dick Cheney for Lying to the American People

This is a smart move on Kucinich's part. There is now no "cover" for the likes of Hilary Clinton who sounds more like a good Republican everyday. Like "triangulation", her position is reduced to a cynical wager that war opponents will choose her in a race against anything the GOP dregs up from amongst its gang of perverts, liars and war whores. No more! A real Democracy will not force upon its sovereign a choice between between the merchants of death and their customers.

Kucinich has drawn a bead on a known criminal, possibly a traitor. Cheney has no hope of shoring up popular support. He is universally reviled, perhaps even by the GOP. One hopes Bush sticks his neck out for Cheney. An extended neck is vulnerable.

This move is, as well, a strong message to Democrats. That message is simply this: we, the people, support Kucinich and we will oppose appeasers who have emasculated the Democratic party and, by doing so, left the American people in the lurch to fend for themselves in Bush's increasingly tyrannical rule.

Kiss-ass Democrats will find Kucinich's move divisive and they would be correct. It will and ought to divide the Democratic party into those who will lead this nation into a new day, what Lincoln would have called a "re-birth of freedom" as opposed to those suck-up Democrats who seem determined to march into hell with George W. Bush and this gang of traitors and liars.

UPDATES

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD VOTES FOR IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT BUSH AND VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY Tuesday, November 6, 2007, 09:27 AM

NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD VOTES FOR IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT BUSH AND VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY

Monday, November 5, 2007
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Marjorie Cohn, NLG President, Marjorie@tjsl.edu; 619-374-6923
Heidi Boghosian, NLG Executive Director, director@nlg.org 212-679-5100, ext. 11
James Marc Leas, NLG member who drafted the resolution, 802 864-1575 or 802 734-8811

November 5, Washington, D.C. The National Lawyers Guild voted unanimously and enthusiastically for the impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney at its national convention in Washington, DC. The resolution lists more than a dozen high crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush and Cheney administration and "calls upon the U.S. House of Representatives to immediately initiate impeachment proceedings, to investigate the charges, and if the investigation supports the charges, to vote to impeach George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney as provided in the Constitution of the United States of America."

The resolution provides for an NLG Impeachment Committee open to all members that will help organize and coordinate events at the local, state, and national level to build public participation in the campaign to initiate impeachment investigation, impeachment, and removal of Bush and Cheney from office without further delay.

The resolution calls on all other state and national bar associations, state and local government bodies, community organizations, labor unions, and all other citizen associations to adopt similar resolutions and to use all their resources to build the campaign demanding that Congress initiate impeachment investigation, impeach, and remove Bush and Cheney from office.

The full text of the resolution can be found at http://nlg.org/convention/2007%20Resolu ... lution.pdf

National Lawyers Guild President Marjorie Cohn said, "The war of aggression, the secret prisons, the use of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, the use of evidence obtained by torture, and the surveillance of citizens without warrants, all initiated and carried out under the tenure of Bush and Cheney, are illegal under the U.S. Constitution and international law.”

Founded in 1937 as an alternative to the American Bar Association, which did not admit people of color, the National Lawyers Guild is the oldest and largest public interest/human rights bar organization in the United States. Its headquarters are in New York and it has chapters in every state.

Congressional switchboard flooded by impeachment calls

"We need to run newspaper ads in the major national and regional papers to energize and recruit concerned persons. This needs lots of money.We need your help now. Click to make an urgently needed donation right now."

- Ramsey Clark

The impeachment movement is at a critical moment. In response to Congressman Dennis Kucinich's attempt to force a discussion and vote on the impeachment of Dick Cheney, the Congressional switchboard was overwhelmed by a flood of calls from impeachment supporters. We must maintain this high level of activity. You can help. ImpeachBush wholeheartedly supports the impeachment of Dick Cheney (House Resolution 333), as well as George W. Bush and all other high officials guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Below is a recap of yesterday's impeachment showdown on the House floor.

House tied in knots over resolution to impeach Cheney

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, is trying to impeach Vice President Cheney for what he describes as "high crimes and misdemeanors" before the invasion of Iraq.

Right after the proposal was read on the House floor this afternoon, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer stepped forwarded and tried to convince lawmakers to table the bill.

"Impeachment is not on our agenda. We have some major priorities. We need to focus on those," Hoyer told Fox News.

Update at 3:39 p.m. ET: We thought that the vote to table was over -- the clock said 0:00 -- but lawmakers are still switching things around and Kucinich is within a few votes of getting his bill to come up for a vote.

Update at 3:43 p.m. ET: At least 149 Republicans have voted in favor of considering the impeachment resolution. Hoyer's motion, which would have blocked a vote, looks like its going to fail by at least 31 votes.

Update at 3:53 p.m. ET: The 15-minute vote began at 2:53 p.m. ET. It's been an hour, and they're still voting. The tally stands at 170-242 right now. Hoyer needed 218 votes to push the bill off the agenda. He's 72 votes short. (As an OD reader later pointed out, Hoyer was 48 votes short, not 72 as we said at the time. Supporters of the measure had a 72 vote lead. We apologize for our mathematical ineptitude.)

Update at 4:02 p.m. ET: Hoyer's motion failed 251-162. The House is now voting on whether to vote on whether the resolution should be sent to the Judiciary Committee.

Update at 4:25 p.m. ET: The vote to decide to vote (yes, you read that correctly) just ended. By a 218-194 margin, the House has to vote on whether to send the resolution to the Judiciary Committee. That's happening right now. 

Update at 4:30 p.m. ET: Perhaps we should pause to explain. When most  Republicans unexpectedly -- and on orders of GOP leadership, the AP is reporting -- switched sides and voted against tabling the measure, they essentially forced Democrats to keep talking about it on the floor. Tabling the measure would have killed it.

Debate over Cheney's impeachment is in direct opposition to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's wishes. She has repeatedly said an impeachment of Cheney or President Bush is off the table. Thus, failing to table this measure is a essentially a jab in Pelosi's ribs.

"We're going to help them out, to explain themselves,"  Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, told the AP of the impeachment's supporters. "We're going to give them their day in court."

Update at 4:32 p.m. ET: The House just voted, 218-194, to send the resolution to the Judiciary Committee. That should end today's debate -- but it does keep the resolution at least technically alive.

We The People Foundation

"50 States Sued to Block Computerized Vote Counting"

This is people power at work. This is people doing something about it.

This people power depends entirely on the people.

So, people, a helping hand might make a difference.

As we used to say, shout, write, sing, dance and chant, when I was young -- Power To The People!

Discoveries

• The Heart and Soul of Country Music
• Ondrej Svadlena - Sanitkasan
• Tom Lehrer - National Brotherhood Week
• Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire - Shall we dance? (1937)
• Kar Wai Wong - There's Only One Sun

The Cowboy's Shared News Items

Impeachment
GOP Corruption
Terrorism
Bush Corruption
Iraq

Spread the word:

The Indictment of Bush and Cheney

People of the United States, on this, the day we celebrate our independence and our freedom, bring down this lawless administration! We shall bring down this tyrant by affirming the very principles of our founding, the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, 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 to 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.

--Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence, July, 1176

We had the guts to take on and defeat a King. We now have the resolve and the legal power to oust a usurper, a would-be dictator. Do it! We have that power. It is time to exercise it. It is time to effect a revolution. It is time to bring to an end this illegitimate occupation of the White House, this perpetual war crime against the people of Iraq.

It is time to indict Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and Powell for having defrauded the people of the United States.

If Bush ever had a right to "rule", he has of his own actions, lost it. His administration daily and deliberately flouts the will of the people, the law, and the Constitution. Bush works overtly to subvert the rule of law. Bush thumbs his nose at Congress, the people, the courts. He recognizes no moral or legal restraints upon his reckless, lawless, and subversive behavior.

He asserts, upon no basis whatsoever, an evil and false theory: a unitary executive, a right wing cult code word for a dictatorship never envisioned by the our founders at any time! It is a concept so pernicious Mussolini might have blushed. Our founding fathers, intelligent, articulate, responsible, worked mightly to prevent anything of the sort ever taking root like an evil weed on this soil.

It's time for this blighted Bush to leave and leave now while there are still shreds of law with which a new republic, a rebirth of freedom might be stitched in the wake this national horror.

Olberman has spoken the truth about Bush's incompetent yet tyrannical reign of terror and faux terrorism.

It's time for Bush to go and it is time for the people to act.

An indictment against George W. Bush has been prepared by a former Federal Prosecutor of some 20 years experience in that role. All that is needed now is a courageous Federal Judge to empanel a Grand Jury. If such a judge should read this blog, please consider this post and the following "indictment" a people's appeal that you empanel a Grand Jury to consider these charges. Readers of this blog, please forward this article to every judge you know and to everyone you know who may know such a judge.

If the indictment needs an update or other revisions, its author Elizabeth de la Vega is an experienced Federal Prosecutor. I would be hopeful that she would step up to that task at this critical time in our nation's history.

Here is the indictment authored by former Federal Prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega via Tomdispatch:

The Indictment

United States v. George W. Bush et al.

By Elizabeth de la Vega

Assistant United States Attorney: Good morning, Ladies and Gentlemen. We're here today in the case of United States v. George W. Bush et al. In addition to President Bush, the defendants are Vice President Richard B. Cheney, former National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice -- who's now the Secretary of State, of course -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and former Secretary of State Colin Powell.

It's a one-count proposed indictment: Conspiracy to Defraud the United States in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371. I'll explain the law that applies to the case this afternoon, but I'm going to hand out the indictment now, so you'll have some context for that explanation. Take as long as you need to read it, and then feel free to take your lunch break, but please leave your copy of the indictment with the foreperson. We'll meet back at one o'clock.

***

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )  Criminal No.
Plaintiff,         )
)  Conspiracy to Defraud
v.  )    the United States
)
GEORGE W. BUSH,   )  18 U.S.C. Section 371
RICHARD B. CHENEY,  )
CONDOLEEZZA RICE,  )
DONALD M. RUMSFELD, and         )
COLIN POWELL,   )
Defendants )

INDICTMENT

THE GRAND JURY CHARGES:

Introductory Allegations
At times relevant to this Indictment:

1. The primary law of the United States Federal Government was set forth in the U.S. Constitution ("Constitution"), which provides that the first branch of government is the Legislative Branch ("Congress"). Pursuant to Article I, Section 8, Congress has certain powers and obligations regarding oversight of foreign affairs, including the powers to: (1) declare war; (2) raise and support the armed forces; and (3) tax and spend for the common good.

2. Article II of the Constitution establishes the Executive Branch. The Executive Power of the United States is vested in the President, who is also the Commander in Chief of the Armed Services.

3. Defendant GEORGE W. BUSH ("BUSH") has been employed as President of the United States since January 20, 2001. On that day, BUSH took a constitutionally mandated oath to faithfully execute the Office of President and to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. BUSH is also constitutionally obligated to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.


4. As Chief Executive, BUSH exercised authority, direction, and control over the entire Executive Branch, which includes the White House, the Office of the Vice President, the Departments of State, Defense, and others, and the National Security Council.

5. Defendant RICHARD B. CHENEY ("CHENEY") has been employed as Vice President of the United States since January 20, 2001.

6. Defendant CONDOLEEZZA RICE ("RICE") was employed as the National Security Adviser from January 2001 to January 2005, when she became Secretary of State, a position she holds as of the date of this indictment. As National Security Adviser, RICE exercised direction, control, and authority over the National Security Council, which coordinates various national security and foreign policy agencies, including the Departments of Defense and State.


7. Defendant DONALD M. RUMSFELD ("RUMSFELD") has been employed as Secretary of Defense since January 2001.

8. Defendant COLIN M. POWELL ("POWELL") was employed as Secretary of State from January 2001 through January of 2005.

9. Before assuming their offices, CHENEY, RICE, RUMSFELD and POWELL took an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.

10. As employees of the Executive Branch, BUSH, CHENEY, RICE, RUMSFELD, and POWELL were governed by Executive Orders 12674 and 12731. These Orders provide that Executive Branch employees hold their positions as a public trust and that the American people have a right to expect that they will fulfill that trust in accordance with certain ethical standards and principles. These include abiding by the Constitution and laws of the United States, as well as not using their offices to further private goals and interests.

11. Pursuant to the Constitution, their oaths of office, their status as Executive Branch employees, and their presence in the United States, BUSH, CHENEY, RICE, RUMSFELD, and POWELL, and their subordinates and employees, are required to obey Title 18, United States Code, Section 371, which prohibits conspiracies to defraud the United States.

12. As used in Section 371, the term "to defraud the United States" means "to interfere with or obstruct one of its lawful government functions by deceit, craft, trickery, or at least by means that are dishonest." The term also means to "impair, obstruct, or defeat the lawful function of any department of government" by the use of "false or fraudulent pretenses or representations."

13. A "false" or "fraudulent" representation is one that is: (a) made with knowledge that it is untrue; (b) a half-truth; (c) made without a reasonable basis or with reckless indifference as to whether it is, in fact, true or false; or (d) literally true, but intentionally presented in a manner reasonably calculated to deceive a person of ordinary prudence and intelligence. The knowing concealment or omission of information that a reasonable person would consider important in deciding an issue also constitutes fraud.

14. Congress is a "department of the United States" within the meaning of Section 371. In addition, hearings regarding funding for military action and authorization to use military force are "lawful functions" of Congress.

15. Accordingly, the presentation of information to Congress and the general public through deceit, craft, trickery, dishonest means, and fraudulent representations, including lies, half-truths, material omissions, and statements made with reckless indifference to their truth or falsity, while knowing and intending that such fraudulent representations would influence Congress' decisions regarding authorization to use military force and funding for military action, constitutes interfering with, obstructing, impairing, and defeating a lawful government function of a department of the United States within the meaning of Section 371.

The Conspiracy to Defraud the United States

16. Beginning on or about a date unknown, but no later than August of 2002, and continuing to the present, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, the defendants,

GEORGE W. BUSH,

RICHARD B. CHENEY,

CONDOLEEZZA RICE,

DONALD M. RUMSFELD, and

COLIN M. POWELL,

and others known and unknown, did knowingly and intentionally conspire to defraud the United States by using deceit, craft, trickery, dishonest means, false and fraudulent representations, including ones made without a reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to their truth or falsity, and omitting to state material facts necessary to make their representations truthful, fair and accurate, while knowing and intending that their false and fraudulent representations would influence the public and the deliberations of Congress with regard to authorization of a preventive war against Iraq, thereby defeating, obstructing, impairing, and interfering with Congress' lawful functions of overseeing foreign affairs and making appropriations.

17. The Early Months of the Bush-Cheney Administration: Prior to January of 2001, BUSH, CHENEY, and RUMSFELD each demonstrated a predisposition to employ U.S. military force to invade the Middle East, including, specifically, to forcibly remove Saddam Hussein.

18. Since 1992, CHENEY has endorsed a "bold foreign policy" that includes using military force to "punish" or "threaten to punish" possible aggressors in order to protect the United States's access to Persian Gulf oil and to halt proliferation of weapons of mass destruction ("WMD"), a term that is customarily used to describe chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.

19. On or about January 26, 1998, RUMSFELD and seven other future BUSH-CHENEY administration appointees signed a letter sent by a conservative policy institute named "Project for a New American Century" ("PNAC") to then President William Clinton, which called for U.S. military action to forcibly remove Saddam Hussein from power.

20. In January 1999, BUSH named RICE and her future Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley ("Hadley"), as his presidential-campaign foreign-policy advisers, along with future Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz ("Wolfowitz") and four others who had publicly advocated forcibly removing Saddam Hussein.

21. On or before September 2000, 12 future BUSH-CHENEY administration appointees, including Wolfowitz, former Assistant to Vice President CHENEY, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and Rumsfeld's long-term aide Stephen Cambone, participated in drafting "Rebuilding America's Defenses," a PNAC policy statement which asserted that the "need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein." PNAC acknowledged that its goals would take a long time to achieve "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event--like a new Pearl Harbor."

22. Once BUSH became the Republican candidate in the 2000 presidential election campaign, he and CHENEY informed the general public that they would be reluctant to use military force and did not believe that the United States should engage in "nation-building."

23. On and after January 20, 2001, BUSH and CHENEY caused to be appointed as senior foreign policy advisors and consultants, at least thirty-four persons who had publicly endorsed the PNAC principles of United States global preeminence and use of force to "punish" or "threaten to punish" emerging threats from weapons of mass destruction ("WMD") or impediments to United States access to oil in the Middle East. Of those appointees, eighteen had also publicly advocated forcibly removing Saddam Hussein.

24. In late December 2000, BUSH and CHENEY advised outgoing President William J. Clinton and others that, among potential foreign policy issues, BUSH's primary concern was Iraq.

25. On February 11, 2001, BUSH ordered the first airstrikes since 1998 to be conducted outside of the United Nations ("UN") agreed-upon No-Fly zones, to get Saddam Hussein's "attention."

26. The Attacks of September 11, 2001. On September 11, 2001, nineteen men hijacked four commercial airplanes. They crashed two planes into the World Trade Towers in New York City and another into the Pentagon in Washington, DC. The fourth plane crashed in Pennsylvania. In total, nearly 3,000 people died as a result of the September 11, 2001, attacks ("9/11").

27. Shortly afterward, United States intelligence agencies determined that 9/11 was the work of the terrorist organization al Qaeda, spearheaded by Osama Bin Laden. Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, two from Yemen, and two from Lebanon. This information, along with the conclusion that no evidence linked Saddam Hussein to the attacks or al Qaeda, was immediately communicated to BUSH, CHENEY, RICE, RUMSFELD, POWELL, and others.

28. BUSH-CHENEY administration members began discussing an invasion of Iraq immediately after 9/11. BUSH, RUMSFELD and others also assigned various subordinates, including former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, CIA Director George Tenet, and General Richard Meyers to look for intelligence that could justify attacking Saddam Hussein's regime.

29. On September 17, 2001, BUSH secretly ordered the formulation of preliminary plans for an invasion of Iraq, while admitting to his aides that no evidence existed to justify an attack.

30. On or about September 18, 2001, in response to BUSH's request, Clarke sent RICE a memo that stated: (a) the case for linking Hussein to 9/11 was weak; (b) only anecdotal evidence linked Hussein to al Qaeda; (c) Osama Bin Laden resented the secularism of Saddam Hussein; and (d) there was no confirmed reporting of Saddam cooperating with Bin Laden on unconventional weapons.

31. On September 20, 2001, BUSH informed British Prime Minister Tony Blair that after Afghanistan, the United States and Britain should return to the issue of invading Iraq.

32. U.S. Intelligence Community Assessments of Risk from Iraq in Effect on November 2001. On occasion, Executive Branch officials request assessments of current intelligence on risks posed by WMD in a given country. Although such assessments are coordinated by the Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA"), the final product incorporates the analyses, including dissenting opinions, of the intelligence branches of the Departments of State, Energy, Defense, the National Security Agency, and others, which are collectively called the Intelligence Community ("IC").

33. As of November 2001, the most recent assessment on Iraq was a December 2000 classified Intelligence Community Assessment ("ICA") called "Iraq: Steadily Pursuing WMD Capabilities." This ICA was a comprehensive update on possible Iraqi efforts to rebuild WMD and weapons delivery systems after the 1998 departure of International Atomic Energy Agency ("IAEA") representatives and UN weapons inspectors, who are collectively referred to as the United Nations Special Commission ("UNSCOM").

34. Regarding Iraq's possible nuclear program, the December 2000 NIE unanimously concluded that:

(a) The IAEA and UNSCOM had destroyed or neutralized Iraq's nuclear infrastructure, but Iraq still had a foundation for future nuclear reconstitution;

(b) Iraq was continuing low-level theoretical research and training, and attempting to obtain dual-use items that cold be used to reconstitute its nuclear program;

(c) if Iraq acquired a significant quantity of fissile material through foreign assistance, it could have a crude nuclear weapon within a year; if Iraq received foreign assistance, it would take five to seven years to produce enough weapons-grade fissile material for a nuclear weapon; and
(d) Iraq did not appear to have reconstituted its nuclear weapons program.

35. Escalation of Military Activity and Planning for Invasion of Iraq. On November 21, 2001, BUSH secretly ordered preparation of a formal war plan for invading Iraq. Thereafter, for sixteen months, the BUSH-CHENEY administration expended substantial U.S. government funds in military activity and planning for invasion of Iraq, all without notice to, or approval by, the U.S. Congress.

36. BUSH did not receive an extensive briefing about possible WMD in Iraq before ordering a war plan, nor did he discuss the legitimacy of grounds for war with anyone. BUSH received no such briefing until December 21, 2002.

37. On or about November 27, 2001, RUMSFELD asked General "Tommy" Franks, head of Central Command, which supervises Middle East operations, to immediately prepare an Iraq war plan in response to BUSH's order.

38. Thereafter, Franks discussed numerous revised Iraq war plans with RUMSFELD. Between December 2001 and August 2002, BUSH, CHENEY, RICE, RUMSFELD, POWELL, and others held at least five lengthy meetings about Franks' plans. In August, BUSH ordered Franks to prepare to invade Iraq using the "Hybrid Plan," a combination of the "Running Start" and "Generated Start" plans developed previously.

39. During 2002, the United States and Great Britain increased air strikes in order to degrade Iraqi air defenses and began deploying troops to areas around Iraq.

40. On or about July 30, 2002, without approval by, or notice to, Congress, BUSH caused the diversion of $700 million from Afghanistan war funds into Iraq invasion preparations.

41. On September 5, 2002, without approval by, or notice to, Congress, BUSH caused approximately 100 United States and British aircraft to launch ballistic missiles at Iraq's major western air-defense facility.

42. By September 12, 2002, without approval by, or notice to, Congress, BUSH had caused the movement of 40,000 military personnel and over 350,000 tons of equipment to areas around Iraq. Franks also ordered Central Command to be moved to Al Udeid Air Base near Doha, Qatar.

43. Behind-the-Scenes Strategizing with British Officials: On or before March 2002, BUSH, RICE, Wolfowitz, and others secretly began discussing ways to persuade the public and foreign allies to accept Bush's goal of invading Iraq, with British Prime Minister Tony Blair ("Blair") and his advisers.

44. On March 12, 2002, in Washington, DC, RICE met with Blair's Foreign Policy Adviser Sir David Manning and informed him of BUSH's problems with persuading "international opinion that military action against Iraq was necessary and justified."

45. On March 17, 2002, in Washington, DC, British Ambassador Sir Christopher Meyer advised Wolfowitz that the two countries should "wrongfoot" Saddam Hussein by seeking a UN resolution that would require the readmission of weapons inspectors with the expectation that Saddam would create a justification for war by obstructing the inspections.

46. On April 6, 2002, in Crawford, Texas, BUSH and Blair discussed strategies to sway public opinion regarding military action in Iraq. Blair agreed to support a United States invasion if the two countries obtained a UN resolution first.

47. In mid-July, 2002, in Washington, DC, White House officials discussed Iraq with visiting British officials. Upon their return to London, these officials reported the talks to Blair in a meeting at 10 Downing St. on July 23, 2002. Among other things, Blair's advisers suggested that he urge BUSH to devise a more realistic political strategy for attacking Iraq, because a desire for "regime change" would not justify military action under international law.

48. In mid-July, 2002, in Washington, DC, CIA Director Tenet and others talked about the Bush administration's intentions regarding Iraq with Sir Richard Dearlove, the head of British Intelligence.

49. On July 23, 2002, during the Downing St. meeting described above, Dearlove informed Blair that in the United States "Military action was now seen as inevitable. BUSH wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

50. On July 23, 2002, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw also noted that BUSH had "made up his mind to take military action." Straw said he would urge POWELL to persuade BUSH to seek a UN resolution requiring Saddam Hussein to readmit weapons inspectors, in effect, suggesting the "wrongfooting" strategy that Meyer had described to Wolfowitz.

51. Behind-the-Scenes Efforts to Fix Intelligence Around the Policy. Within weeks after learning from Clarke, Tenet, and others that Iraq and Saddam Hussein had no involvement with either 9/11 or al Qaeda, RUMSFELD caused Deputy Undersecretary for Defense Douglas Feith ("Feith") to secretly create the Counter Terrorism Group ("CTEG"), a small unit of political appointees whose mission was to find links between Iraq and al Qaeda by reviewing raw intelligence that previously had been discarded as unreliable. CTEG reported weekly to RUMSFELD's long-term associate Stephen Cambone, and occasionally presented information directly to Wolfowitz, thereby circumventing standard IC procedures.

52. At some time in 2002, Feith also designated political appointees to work under his supervision in the newly-created Office of Special Plans, whose purpose was to develop and package information for use in marketing the President's plan for an invasion of Iraq. In the fall of 2002, this group presented information directly to RUMSFELD, to RICE's office, and to CHENEY's office, thereby circumventing standard IC procedures.

53. In the spring of 2002, CHENEY and his former aide, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, began visiting CIA headquarters to question CIA agents' assessments about Iraq. RUMSFELD and Deputy National Security Adviser Hadley also repeatedly pressed CIA Director Tenet and his subordinates to present a stronger case against Iraq.

54. Bush's Creation of the White House Iraq Group. By the summer of 2002, domestic and international support for BUSH's plan to invade Iraq was lukewarm. At the same time, Bush's chief political strategist and Senior Adviser Karl Rove and Kenneth Mehlman, head of the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives, were beginning to coordinate the President's involvement in the November 7, 2002, congressional election. Their overall goal was to gain Republican majorities in both houses of Congress so that the President would have the greatest possible support for his policies. Rove had specifically recommended that Republicans "focus on war" as a way to win elections. Consequently, in the summer of 2002, BUSH's efforts to win support for an invasion of Iraq and his efforts to assist Republican congressional candidates became inextricably intertwined.

55. In the summer of 2002, BUSH caused the creation of the White House Iraq Group, which was cochaired by BUSH's long-term political operatives Karl Rove and Karen Hughes, who remained BUSH's close associate even though she had resigned her position as Counselor to the President. This team, also called WHIG, was largely a political and public-relations entity that included RICE, Hadley, President's Chief of Staff Andrew Card, President's legislative liaison Nicholas Calio, CHENEY's key aide and veteran Republican political strategist Mary Matalin, CHENEY's senior adviser Libby, and James Wilkinson, another Republican campaign consultant.

56. On or about September 6, 2002, Rove and Card publicly announced that: (a) the BUSH-CHENEY administration was beginning to "roll out" its case for an invasion of Iraq; (b) its public-relations campaign was specifically directed at forcing Congress to pass a resolution authorizing the President to use military force in Iraq; (c) BUSH wanted the resolution passed in about five weeks, before the 2002 election; and (d) in the end, it would be difficult for any legislator to vote against it.

57. The Defendants' Massive Fraud to "Market" an invasion of Iraq. On or about September 4, 2002, BUSH staged a photo opportunity with a bipartisan group of congressional leaders, after which he falsely and fraudulently announced that Iraq posed a serious threat to the safety of the United States and the world, while concealing from Congress and the American people the material facts that: (a) he had no reasonable basis whatsoever for his assertion; (b) he had never discussed the legitimacy of the grounds for an attack against Iraq with anyone; (c) he had never extensively reviewed existing intelligence regarding any possible threat from Iraq; (d) he had not requested an updated intelligence assessment on Iraq; (e) the United States intelligence assessment then in effect stated that Iraq had neither nuclear weapons nor a nuclear weapons program; and (f) the IC had consistently reported that Iraq had no involvement in 9/11 and no relationship with al Qaeda.

58. On September 4, 2002, BUSH also falsely and fraudulently claimed he was beginning an "open dialogue" with the American public, with Congress, and with United States allies to decide how to respond to Iraq, while concealing the material facts that he: (a) had requested a formal plan to invade Iraq nearly a year before; (b) had been conducting significant military and nonmilitary planning and attacks against Iraq for a year; (c) had directed significant military deployment to areas around Iraq; (d) was planning a massive air assault against Iraq's air defense facility for the next day; and (e) intended to work with the UN only to create a justification to use military force against Iraq.

59. Thereafter, the defendants and WHIG executed a calculated and wide-ranging strategy to deceive Congress and the American people by making hundreds of false and fraudulent representations that were only half-true, or literally true but misleading; by concealing material facts; and by making statements without a reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to their truth, regarding, among other things:

(a) their true intent to invade Iraq;

(b) the extent of military buildup and force used against Iraq without notice to or approval by Congress;

(c) their true purpose in seeking a Congressional resolution authorizing the use of military force against Iraq;

(d) their true intent to use their involvement in seeking a UN resolution requiring Iraq to cooperate with weapons inspectors as a sham; and

(e) their claimed justifications for invading Iraq, including but not limited to:

* The alleged connection between Saddam Hussein and the attacks of September 11, 2001;

* The alleged connection between Iraq and al Qaeda;

* The alleged connection between Saddam Hussein and any terrorists whose primary animus was directed towards the United States;

* Saddam Hussein's alleged intent to attack the United States in any way;

• Saddam Hussein's possession of nuclear weapons and the status of any alleged ongoing nuclear weapons programs;

* The lack of any reasonable basis for asserting with certainty that Saddam Hussein was actively manufacturing chemical and biological weapons; and

*The alleged urgency of any threat posed to the United States by Saddam Hussein.

60. Congressional Joint Resolution to Authorize Use of Force Against Iraq. As a result of the defendants' false and fraudulent "marketing" of the President's plan to invade Iraq, on October 11, 2002, the U.S Congress, acting pursuant to its Article I constitutional authority to oversee and authorize use of military force, passed a Congressional Joint Resolution to Authorize Use of Force Against Iraq ["the Resolution"] which stated:

The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--

(a) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(b) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

61. The Resolution required the President to, either before or within 48 hours after exercising the authority to use force, make available to the Senate and the House of Representatives his determination that:

(a) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (1) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (2) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(b) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

62. The Resolution also required the President to, at least every 60 days, present Congress a report on "matters relevant to this joint resolution."

63. In furtherance of the above-described conspiracy, the defendants and their coconspirators committed and caused to be committed the following overt acts:

Overt Acts

A. On December 9, 2001, CHENEY announced on NBC's Meet the Press that "it was pretty well confirmed" that lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta had met the head of Iraqi intelligence in Prague in April 2001, which statement was, as CHENEY well knew, made without reasonable basis and with reckless disregard for the truth, because it was based on a single witness's uncorroborated allegation that had not been fully investigated by U.S. intelligence agencies.

B. On July 15, 2002, POWELL stated on Ted Koppel's Nightline: "What we have consistently said is that the President has no plan on his desk to invade Iraq at the moment, nor has one been presented to him, nor have his advisors come together to put a plan to him," which statement was deliberately false and misleading in that it deceitfully implied the President was not planning an invasion of Iraq when, as POWELL well knew, the President was close to finalizing detailed military plans for such an invasion that he had ordered months previously.

C. On August 26, 2002, CHENEY made numerous false and fraudulent statements including: "Simply stated there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us," when, as CHENEY well knew, this statement was made without reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to the truth in that the IC's then prevailing assessment was that Iraq had neither nuclear weapons nor a reconstituted nuclear weapons program.

D. On September 7, 2002, appearing publicly with Blair, BUSH claimed a recent IAEA report stated that Iraq was "six months away from developing a [nuclear] weapon" and "I don't know what more evidence we need," which statements were made without basis and with reckless indifference to the truth in that: (1) the IAEA had not even been present in Iraq since 1998; and (2) the report the IAEA did write in 1998 had concluded there was no indication that Iraq had the physical capacity to produce weapons-usable nuclear material or that it had attempted to obtain such material.

E. On September 8, 2002, on Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, RICE asserted that Saddam Hussein was acquiring aluminum tubes that were "only suited" for nuclear centrifuge use, which statement was deliberately false and fraudulent, and made with reckless indifference to the truth in that it omitted to state the following material facts: (1) the U.S. intelligence community was deeply divided about the likely use of the tubes; (2) there were at least fifteen intelligence reports written since April 2001 that cast doubt on the tubes' possible nuclear-related use; and (3) the U.S. Department of Energy nuclear weapons experts had concluded, after analyzing the tubes's specifications and the circumstances of the Iraqis' attempts to procure them, that the aluminum tubes were not well suited for nuclear centrifuge use and were more likely intended for artillery rocket production.

F. On September 8, 2002, RUMSFELD stated on Face the Nation: "Imagine a September 11th, with weapons of mass destruction. It's not three thousand, it's tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children," which statement was deliberately fraudulent and misleading in that it implied without reasonable basis and in direct contradiction to then prevailing intelligence that Saddam Hussein had no operational relationship with al Qaeda and was unlikely to provide weapons to terrorists.

G. On September 19, 2002, RUMSFELD told the Senate Armed Services Committee that "no terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people than the regime of Saddam Hussein," which statement was, as Rumsfeld well knew, made without reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to the truth in that: (1) Hussein had not acted aggressively toward the United States since his alleged attempt to assassinate President George H. W. Bush in 1993; (2) Iraq's military forces and equipment were severely debilitated because of UN sanctions imposed after the 1991 Gulf War; (3) the IC's opinion was that Iraq's sponsorship of terrorists was limited to ones whose hostility was directed toward Israel; and (4) Iran, not Iraq, was the most active state sponsor of terrorism.

H. On October 1, 2002, the defendants caused the IC's updated classified National Intelligence Estimate to be delivered to Congress just hours before the beginning of debate on the Authorization to Use Military Force. At the same time, the defendants caused an unclassified "White Paper" to be published which was false and misleading in many respects in that it failed to include qualifying language and dissents that substantially weakened their argument that Iraq posed a serious threat to the United States.

I. On October 7, 2002, in Cincinnati, Ohio, BUSH made numerous deliberately misleading statements to the nation, including stating that in comparison to Iran and North Korea, Iraq posed a uniquely serious threat, which statement BUSH well knew was false and fraudulent in that it omitted to state the material fact that a State Department representative had been informed just three days previously that North Korea had actually already produced nuclear weapons. The defendants continued to conceal this information until after Congress passed the Authorization to Use Military Force against Iraq.

J. Between September 1, 2002, and November 2, 2002, BUSH traveled the country making in excess of thirty congressional-campaign speeches in which he falsely and fraudulently asserted that Iraq was a "serious threat" which required immediate action, when as he well knew, this assertion was made without reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to the truth.

K. In his January 28, 2003 State of the Union address, BUSH announced that the "British have recently learned that Iraq was seeking significant quantities of uranium from Africa" which statement was fraudulent and misleading and made with reckless disregard for the truth, in that it falsely implied that the information was true, when the CIA had advised the administration more than once that the allegation was unsupported by available intelligence.

L. In a February 5, 2003, speech to the UN, POWELL falsely implied, without reasonable basis and with reckless disregard for the truth, that, among other things: (1) those who maintained that Iraq was purchasing aluminum tubes for rockets were allied with Saddam Hussein, even though POWELL well knew that both Department of Energy nuclear weapons experts and State Department intelligence analysts had concluded that the tubes were not suited for nuclear centrifuge use; and (2) Iraq had an ongoing cooperative relationship with al Qaeda, when he well knew that no intelligence agency had reached that conclusion.

M. On March 18, 2003, BUSH sent a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the Senate which asserted that further reliance on diplomatic and peaceful means alone would not either: (1) adequately protect United States national security against the "continuing threat posed by Iraq" or (2) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant UN Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq, which statement was made without reasonable basis and with reckless indifference to the truth in that, as BUSH well knew, the U.S. intelligence community had never reported that Iraq posed an urgent threat to the United States and there was no evidence whatsoever to prove that Iraq had either the means or intent to attack the U.S. directly or indirectly. The statement was also false because, as BUSH well knew, the UN weapons inspectors had not found any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and wanted to continue the inspection process because it was working well.

N. In the same March 18, 2003 letter, BUSH also represented that taking action pursuant to the Resolution was "consistent with continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001," which statement was entirely false and without reasonable basis in that, as BUSH well knew, Iraq had no involvement with al Qaeda or the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371.

A TRUE BILL

[Note: This is not an actual indictment] My comment: but it might become one!

Please keep in mind that the above indictment deals with only one count. There are, in fact, many cases that may be made against this outlaw. They will include but are not limited to the following future installments. Each heading is an impeachable offense.

• Lied about Iraq to Congress, the Public, and the United Nations.
• 9-11 Cover-Up and Obstruction of Justice.
• Violated Rights of Citizens including Habeas Corpus.
  
• NSA Program to spy on Citizens without Warrant.
• Violated International Treaties Including Geneva Convention.
  
• Actively Encouraged, as a Policy, Use of Torture.
• Gross Negligence on Hurricane Katrina.
• Iraq Contract Corruption--Bremer "Lost" $8 billion in cash, sole source awards, and gross negligence in managing the peace.
• Stole Ohio election in 2004.

Additional Resources:

• United States V. George W. Bush et al. (Paperback)by Elizabeth De La Vega
• American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America
• Impeach the President: The Case Against Bush And Cheney
• Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic
• Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War
• Armed Madhouse: From Baghdad to New Orleans--Sordid Secrets and Strange Tales of a White House Gone Wild

And for everyone who is "tired of being fucked around by imbeciles..."

---