Slate highlights the abuses. They can not halt the abuses. Only the Judiciary Chairman can.

Why won't he?

==============
I M P E A C H

In the Slate diagram linked above, there is this concise summary of reasons pro/con prosecution of George W. Bush and Richard Cheney. IMHO, the reasons for far outweigh the reasons against:

Bush:

"Case for Prosecution: The President, in his capacity as commander-in-chief of the military, is responsible for the actions of his subordinates who broke the laws.

The Case Against Prosecution: House Speaker Pelosi won't even talk about impeachment."

Cheney:

"Case for Prosecution: The Vice President and his office have pushed hard for violation of the law, fought to immunize lawbreakers, and obstructed inquiries into lawlessness.

The Case Against Prosecution: House Speaker Pelosi won't even talk about impeachment."

It would seem that the legal and moral reasons against prosecution are rather weak and in fact, are quite suspect. Why would the Speaker of the House obstruct inquiry, and prosecution of crimes by the Executive? Perhaps this odd and dangerous apparent indifference of the Speaker to the Executive's violations of the Constitution itself also warrants investigation?

article and interactive feature; very illustrative, informative, and - as Unspun pointed out - concise in its analysis regarding why some of these officials have not yet been held accountable. It's interesting that after investigations conducted by Congress, legal experts, and journalists; all roads lead to impeachmenst of Bush and Cheney - and to obstruction by Pelosi.

We are growing increasingly weary and disturbed by Pelosi's refusal to allow the House to use all available tools to restore the rule of law. I agree with Unspun's final point that this is highly suspect and, perhaps, also requires investigation. I hope the House Speaker proves us wrong, that she seriously considers the option of impeachment(s) soon.

Thank you for sharing this Slate article with us, Chairman.

...Presidency and Abuses of Power". Dean was actually scheduled to testify at the hearing on July 25th, following Rep. Kucinich, but had to cancel because of illness. Here are a few snips from his column:

"...Given the fact that Bush will be out of office in less than six months, it is not likely that the Kucinich resolution will receive the consideration it deserves. This is unfortunate. It has been clear to me since 2004, when I...analyzed the basis for the very charge that Kucinich has now leveled, that Bush’s actions with regard to Congress – in essence, telling Congress and the American people a deadly lie involving the nation’s blood and treasure – constituted, without question, a “high crime” and impeachable behavior."

"...It struck me that given my knowledge of the Nixon presidency, and because few in Congress today realize that Nixon was sent packing for a far lesser lie, I might focus my testimony on why Nixon was removed from office. In short, I might be able to add some perspective for the Kucinich resolution. In this column, I will also offer the perspective my experience with Nixon affords, as I consider the case for impeaching Bush..."

"...Also, there is no shortage of witnesses who can discuss the abuses of power by Bush and Cheney, to create a record of how they have gone beyond established constitutional limitations... Neither the federal courts nor voters have been inclined to rein in an outsized American presidency under the Republicans, because the federal judiciary is dominated by conservative Republicans...and the average American voter does not have a clue about the cost he or she pays for an imperial presidency. So it has come down to the congressional Democrats (and a few moderate Republicans) to deal with the bloated presidential powers that have disrupted the Constitution’s balance..."

"...While many Democrats on the committee, I am sure, would agree with my analysis, the ability to act hinges on Republicans: Only if Republicans understand the institutional damage they are tolerating is there any true chance of remedial action..."

"...Accordingly, I thought if I could merely make the point that conservatives, at one point, decided that they could not tolerate Nixon’s imperial behavior, and explain exactly why they came to that decision, it might clear the Republicans’ focus to deal with Bush and Cheney. Unfortunately, explaining this Nixon-versus-Congress history would be no easy task, for I discovered how ignorant current members of Congress are about Watergate when testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee a few years ago. At that hearing, South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsay Graham made statements and asked questions about Watergate that were less informed that I get from today’s average high school student..."

Mr. Dean's whole column is worthy of reading, IMHO. It is extremely unfortunate that he wasn't able to testify at the Judiciary Committee Hearings. BTW, IMHO, if anything is to change, there must be a new President who is not a "conservative Republican" and who will, hopefuly, restore the balance of the federal judiciary and Supreme court which is now so extremely fanatically partisan as to endanger us and our liberties until they are removed from office.

Nancy Pelosi was on TV with her family this morning, promoting a new book.

It was a standard "aren't I wonderful" kind of interview right up until Joy Behar asked her point blank why she hasn't pushed for the impeachment of Bush. She didn't say it was the responsibility of the Judiciary Committee, she said she didn't because it would have impeded the bi-partisanship Congress would depend on to pass much needed legislation. Then she went on to talk about her meager legislative victories, without once mentioning the GOP obstructionism that has plagued the 110th Congress, or the incredibly high number of veto's by Bush.

When further pressed, she insisted that IF there was actually honest to goodness evidence of criminal activity by these people, she would be more than willing to take up the issue.

Two things struck me about the interview. Neither Whoopie nor Elizabeth Hasselback had much to say, and the audience immediately broke out in spontaneous applause the second Joy finished asking about impeachment.

It seemed as if Mrs. Pelosi was throwing the ball back to you Mr. Conyers.

I might feel a little better if I knew that the information you possessed about the crimes of Bush, was shared with the majority leader of the house, in such a way that she couldn't deny it.

By the sounds of today's interview, being a good soldier might just get you thrown under a bus by one of the gentrifiers of SF's waterfront district. The least she could have done was deflect it back to you. Instead, she alludes that you aren't doing your job.

There really is no honor among thieves.

from the budget. He's leaving the next President a $482 BILLION BUDGET DEFICIT:

"...The next president will inherit a record budget deficit of $482 billion, according to a new Bush administration estimate released Monday...But the numbers could go even higher if the economy performs worse than the White House predicts...A $482 billion deficit, however, would easily surpass the record deficit of $413 billion set in 2004."

I CAN act unconstitutionally as President of the U.S.A.
... Conyers, as much, has said so.
I CAN act like a war criminal and be President of the U.S.A.
... Conyers, as much, has said so.
I CAN tell Congress to get Cheney'd as President of the U.S.A.
... Conyers, as much, has said so.
I CAN lie to Congress for ulterior motives as President of the U.S.A.
... Conyers, as much, has said so.
I CAN BE a lot of things as President of the U.S.A.
... Conyers, as much, has said so.

What I CAN'T BE, according to the actions of Congressman John Conyers... is accountable.

For your amusement...
Harry Shearer and the Turd Blossom Special...

Karl Rove Abscond Day Count... 18

Some headlines...
Still at Code Yellow, DHS fears 11 months of 'heightened alert'

With 99 days until the presidential election, the Department of Homeland Security is raising vague concerns about possible terrorist attacks in the US or abroad.

ABC News' Pierre Thomas says DHS officials are "quietly declaring" that the US is entering a "Period of Heightened Alert" because of the upcoming Olympics, the Democratic and Republican conventions, the November elections and the fact that a new president will be taking office in January. Officials tell Thomas the next 11 months will be "a time frame when terrorists may have more incentive to attack."

Accusations of politicization haunted DHS's decision to move the nation's color-coded advisory system from yellow, or elevated risk, to orange, or high risk, just three months before the 2004 election. (A week after President Bush was re-elected, the agency returned the advisory back to yellow.)

This time around, DHS isn't changing colors, Thomas reports, because the "do not want to be accused of trying to inject themselves into the presidential campaign."

Instead, apparently, anonymous officials are simply passing unspecific warnings to a correspondent for a national television network.

(continued)

LIVE IN PERPETUAL FEAR...
The Administration will tell it's puppet MSM what color you should fear today, kids, based on non-specific information. Like carrying an umbrella on a bright sunny September day, you never know when it's gonna rain... HELL ON EARTH!

US-created terrorism documentary shown at Gitmo tribunal; introduced as 'evidence'

GUANTANAMO BAY U.S. NAVAL BASE, Cuba (Reuters) - Prosecutors in the trial of Osama bin Laden's driver unveiled a graphic video on Monday of the September 11 attacks and other al Qaeda operations that is likely to play a repeated role in pending war crimes cases.

The video is entitled "The Al Qaeda Plan," an echo of "The Nazi Plan" made by Oscar-winning director George Stevens as evidence in the Nuremberg war crimes trials of German leaders after World War II.

"Oh my God" was heard repeatedly as crowds watched the twin towers of the World Trade center collapse on September 11, 2001, in a vivid highlight of the movie shown over defense objections at the terrorism conspiracy trial of Salim Hamdan.

The six-member panel that will decide Hamdan's fate also saw footage of charred bodies stripped of flesh in the bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa and the body of a U.S. soldier dragged through the streets in Somalia in 2003.

...

"The Al Qaeda Plan" was made for $25,000 by terrorism consultant Evan Kohlmann for the Office of Military Commissions, which is conducting the trials of terrorism suspects at Guantanamo. Its 90 minutes of video clips depict the history of al Qaeda from its formation in 1988 through the September 11 attacks.

The commission's lead prosecutor, Col. Lawrence Morris, said the tape would be used in other trials but no decision had been made whether to use it in the trial of accused September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

(continued)

Because nothing screams justice like a corps and editing... NO?
GOT HOLLYWOOD...?

Bush approves execution of soldier on death row

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Monday approved the execution of an Army private, the first time in over a half-century that a president has affirmed a death sentence for a member of the U.S. military.

With his signature from the Oval Office, Bush said yes to the military's request to execute Ronald A. Gray, the White House confirmed. Gray had had been convicted in connection with a spree of four murders and eight rapes in the Fayetteville, N.C., area over eight months in the late 1980s while stationed at Fort Bragg.

"While approving a sentence of death for a member of our armed services is a serious and difficult decision for a commander in chief, the president believes the facts of this case leave no doubt that the sentence is just and warranted," White House press secretary Dana Perino said.

(continued)

This does, in no way, explain the other 4124 and climbing that Bush sentenced to their deaths... does it.

MAIN CORE:
New Evidence Reveals Top Secret Government Database Used in Bush Spy Program

Physicians for Human Rights
Rights Group Wants US Officials Probed for Ordering Torture

Washington - A Nobel-prize-winning rights group said US officials committed war crimes by ordering what the group says was torture of detainees, and called for them to be probed and prosecuted.

(continued)

Lastly,
A question neither Obama or McCain will ever face... WHY?

=============
Sorry for the brevity[/snark].
It's been a long week and it's only Monday.
==============
I M P E A C H
or R E S I G N!!!

is it just me?

As you may or may not know, Blackwater Security is pulling out of Iraq, stating, more or less, that they want to focus on other issues. O.K., for Blackwater to pull out of Iraq is not overly astounding, but the TIMING is. It follow on the heels of two weeks of martial law training in Indianapolis, Indiana, last month. There are over 800 detention camps, across the boards, most having railraod tracks leading to them.

This, coupled with the threat of an attack on Iran, the relative quiet from Bush, Cheney, and, even from McCain.

Of course, Impeachment proceedings would curtail any such possibilities.

"There is nothing to fear but fear itself."
Franklin D. Roosevelt

Pelosi said she would impeach if she knew of a crime he committed

Submitted by Bob Fertik on July 28, 2008 - 8:03pm
ImpeachForChange Nancy Pelosi

I feel like I've just gone through the looking glass. It's been 3 years and 3 months since the Downing Street Memo was published, yet today Speaker Pelosi told The View she would impeach Bush if she only had "the goods." Dennis Kucinich produced "the goods" in the form of 35+1 detailed Articles of Impeachment. Speaker Pelosi, have you read any of these Articles? Call Pelosi at 202-225-0100.

JOY BEHAR: You’ve ruled against impeaching George Bush and Dick Cheney. And now Kucinich is trying to pass that. Why do you, why do you insist on not impeaching these people so that the world and America can really see the crimes that they’ve committed?

[applause]

PELOSI: Well, I think that it- I think it was important- When I became speaker- and by the way, a very important position, president, vice president, speaker of the House- I saw it as my responsibility to try to bring a much divided country together to the extent that we could. I thought that impeachment would be divisive for the country. In terms of what we wanted to set out to do, we wanted to raise the minimum wage, give the biggest increase in veterans benefits to veterans in 77 year history, the veteran- pass research in stem cell- the stem cell research, all of that. This week we’re going to pass equal pay for equal work. It has been a long time in coming [applause], pay equity. We’re going to pass legislation for product safety, for toys that children put in them. There’s an agenda that you have to get done, that you have to try to do it in a bipartisan way. The president has to sign it. If somebody had a crime that the president had committed, that would be a different story.

Apparently, Ms. Pelosi needs enlightenment! Let's get her up to date!!!!

Fax: 202-225-8259
Phone: 202-225-0100
Email: sf.nancy@mail.house.gov
Please call, FAX and email Speaker Pelosi with your lists of Bush Administration crimes.

To help you compose a letter or other communication, review the following.

Executive Summary of House Judiciary Committee Minority Report
Report

“This Minority Report has been produced at the request of Representative John Conyers, Jr., Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee. He made this request in the wake of the President’s failure to respond to a letter submitted by 122 Members of Congress and more than 500,000 Americans in July of this year asking him whether the assertions set forth in the Downing Street Minutes were accurate. Mr. Conyers asked staff, by year end 2005, to review the available information concerning possible misconduct by the Bush Administration in the run up to the Iraq War and post-invasion statements and actions, and to develop legal conclusions and make legislative and other recommendations to him. . . . .

"There is nothing to fear but fear itself."
Franklin D. Roosevelt