The crusty, congealed pea soup of the attorney scandal is put through the blender.

Kyle Sampson testimony (Wash Post article here and excerpt below):

That's too bad for the GOP, because Sampson seemed content to fall on his sword rather than naming names when he was questioned about the prosecutor mess. Only the red felt on the witness table concealed the blood. "I could have and should have helped to prevent this," Sampson offered. "I let the attorney general and the department down. . . . I failed to organize a more effective response. . . . It was a failure on my part. . . . I will hold myself responsible. . . . I wish we could do it all over again."

The witness fessed up to an expanding list of sins. He admitted that the Justice Department was trying to circumvent the Senate confirmation process. He confessed that he proposed firing Patrick Fitzgerald, the prosecutor in the Valerie Plame leak case. "I regretted it," he explained. "I knew that it was the wrong thing to do."

But the self-sacrificing witness still managed -- inadvertently, perhaps -- to implicate Gonzales and Bush's chief political strategist, Karl Rove. Sampson, who resigned from the Justice Department earlier this month, admitted that Gonzales "had received a complaint from Karl Rove about U.S. attorneys in three jurisdictions." Asked about the accuracy of Gonzales's claim of non-involvement, Sampson confessed: "I don't think it's entirely accurate what he said."

Karl Rove is at the center, it would seem, of almost all wrongdoing and illegal action the White House is entangled in.  Boot him.  Get rid of him.

Fitting that Rove is being a 'funny' man and trying out his rap skills as "MC Rove."  This is painful to watch, especially since he starts out be (I suppose joking) how he "rips the tops off" small animals.  No, just rips the top off the Constitution...

Watch it here to see, truly, how the Bush Administration conducts its day-to-day business:  MC Rove

I've been following the schism in the Christian right concerning Cizik and his evangelical movement.  Cizik has the 'gall' to protest torture in Guantanamo and say that evidence supports global warming.  Why this would upset the more traditional in the Christian right is confusing, but I suppose it has a lot to do with holding onto power, money and influence both in the church community at large and the entire republican political structure.  People like Cizik hold many of the same values but see morality as something much larger than gays and fetuses.  I congratulate him.

Link to Christian right at crossroads - Boston.com

Link to Justice official to plead the Fifth before Senate panel - CNN.com

Time to clean house.  Nobody can speak nor provide transcripts of meetings because they...are...TERRIFIED.  They've broken the law and now they scramble to hide it.  Alberto Gonzalez, proponent of torture and removal of habeas corpus.  What a guy.  Now it would seem everyone connected with him in attorney-gate is scrambling to disconnect and hide under a rock.

All paths lead back to Karl Rove.  I'm convinced that the man will do anything to 'win' whatever goal he pursues.  Ethics and morality disappeared some time ago and this man runs the show for W and the rest.

A story that gets little press coverage, so little in fact that I cannot find updates in the mainstream media.  The US government outsourcing military "security".  Casualties for these private companies are not recorded in statistics and neither are their activities closely monitored.  Litigation is still pending for the death of the blackwater employees in 2004.  See stories below and the book link.

Blackwater Mercenary Firm:  ABC News Blog RE Blackwater

Democracy Now article regarding Blackwater:  Interview with author of "Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army"

Book on Amazon:  Blackwater Book on Amazon

The thickens plot. 

From the Washington Post (full article here, Attorney Plotting):

Some of the thousands of pages of e-mails released this week underscore the extraordinary planning and effort, at the highest levels of the Justice Department and White House, to secure Griffin a job running one of the smaller U.S. attorney's offices in the country.

The e-mails show how D. Kyle Sampson, then the attorney general's chief of staff, and other Justice officials prepared to use a change in federal law to bypass input from Arkansas' two Democratic senators, who had expressed doubts about placing a former Republican National Committee operative in charge of a U.S. attorney's office. The evidence runs contrary to assurances from Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales that no such move had been planned.

"This was a very loyal soldier to the Republicans and the Bush administration, and they wanted to reward him," said Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.). "They had every right to do this, but it's the way they handled it, and the way they tried to cover their tracks and mislead Congress, that has turned this into a fiasco for them."

Wow...it seems that there is no end to the dishonesty and corruption.  Moral majority indeed.

From the Washington Post Article (full story here Politicizing of Justice Dept):

Eubanks, who retired from Justice in December 2005, said she is coming forward now because she is concerned about what she called the "overwhelming politicization" of the department demonstrated by the controversy over the firing of eight U.S. attorneys. Lawyers from Justice's civil rights division have made similar claims about being overruled by supervisors in the past.

Eubanks said Congress should not limit its investigation to the dismissal of the U.S. attorneys.

"Political interference is happening at Justice across the department," she said. "When decisions are made now in the Bush attorney general's office, politics is the primary consideration. . . . The rule of law goes out the window."

Everything the Bush administration has touched seems to be rotting from within.  It flat out stinks.  Reeks actually.  The "Patriot" Act, Military Commissions Act.  We might as well bundle all of this up into the "Strip Americans of Civil Liberties Act."

From the Washington Post (full article here, Wash Post-FBI Scandal March 21

The Justice Department's inspector general told a committee of angry House members yesterday that the FBI may have violated the law or government policies as many as 3,000 times since 2003 as agents secretly collected the telephone, bank and credit card records of U.S. citizens and foreign nationals residing here.

Inspector General Glenn A. Fine said that according to the FBI's own estimate, as many as 600 of these violations could be "cases of serious misconduct" involving the improper use of "national security letters" to compel telephone companies, banks and credit institutions to produce records.

A bunch of lying liars indeed.  From the Washington Post:

President Bush sought yesterday to defuse the controversy over the firings of U.S. attorneys, offering strong support for embattled Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales while proposing to make Karl Rove and other top aides available for private interviews with congressional investigators.

The White House, however, limited the kinds of questions the aides would answer and said the interviews may not be conducted under oath or transcribed. The conditions enraged congressional Democrats, who vowed to go ahead with plans to issue subpoenas as early as today that would compel the aides to testify.

Full article here:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/20/AR2007032000111.html?referrer=email

Since I didn't see a lot of press regarding this, I'll post it here to catch a few people.  Below is the report from www.impeachbush.org.

Also, coverage from:  Democracy Now March 19 2007

Tens of Thousands March on the Pentagon and Call for Impeachment

The March on the Pentagon, March 17, 2007

Congratulations to everyone who made it through the snow and freezing rain to get to Washington and join together in the tens of thousands and March on the Pentagon marking the beginning of the fifth year of the war against Iraq. The Impeachment message was broadcast loud and clear and reached a national and worldwide audience!

The Demonstration Stikes A Nerve

Disgraced Tom Delay went on television Sunday morning and complained on Meet the Press that "we shouldn't have had what we had yesterday...in Washington, D.C." with people calling for "impeaching the commander in chief." Much as Tom Delay would probably like to see the First Amendment removed from the Bill of Rights, the stark reality that he and the White House faced was a huge outpouring of people from across the United States calling for the Impeachment of Bush, Cheney and other high officials. Feeling the heat from mass demonstrations around the country, Bush was forced to go on national television Monday and "plead for patience" from the people of the United States.

Led by a contingent of Iraq war veterans, active-duty service-members, Gold Star families, and veterans from other past and present wars, the demonstration received a large amount of media coverage. CNN featured the demonstration, which the report described as a march of tens of thousands, in its rotation Saturday and Sunday. There were hundreds of articles in US newspapers and world wide, and photographs featuring thousands of impeachment signs including, "Guilty of War Crimes, ImpeachBush.org." The major French newspaper, Le Monde, ran a significant article under the headline, "More than 50,000 People Protest Against the War in Iraq," about the March on the Pentagon and wrote that the protestors were calling for the impeachment of Bush for war crimes. The rally was broadcast live on C-span and Al-Jazeera. Ramsey Clark; Cindy Sheehan; Cynthia McKinney; Jonathan Hutto and Liam Madden, co-founders of Appeal for Redress; Iraq Veterans Against the War; Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson; constitutional rights attorney Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, and others spoke. You can view the rally by going to  http://www.cspan.org/ and clicking on the March 17 anti-war rally under the video section.  Ramsey Clark's speech is available on YouTube by clicking on this link.

The March on the Pentagon was not a solitary action but one of more than 1,000 protests that are taking place in the U.S. between March 17 and March 20. ImpeachBush.org played a major role in co-sponsoring the March on the Pentagon as well as the Los Angeles demonstration that drew 50,000 and the San Francisco demonstration of 40,000 that  filled 15 blocks of Market Street, a six-lane avenue. Impeachment supporters have been out at rallies around the country all week.

Ramsey Clark speaking at the March on the Pentagon
Click to see his speech.

The March on the Pentagon took place the day after a severe winter snow and sleet storm suddenly hit northeastern states that prevented many buses from traveling, 700 fights from taking off, and thousands of cars from reaching the March. Motorists were advised throughout New England and the Mid-Atlantic region to stay off the road. The large turnout at the demonstration was all the more significant given the hardships people had to endure to participate in the activity. People marched to the Pentagon and stayed as long as they could braving 20 mile-an-hour winds and a windchill factor into the teens.

A great thank you is owed to the committed volunteers who endured a torrential downpour of freezing rain though Friday night to help set up the assembly and rally sites. People stayed overnight with the equipment and then began working again at 5:00 am in complete darkness. The assembly area had become a lake on March 16 and filled with mud by the time the march stepped off. The windchill in the early hours was not far above zero.  At the rally site the large tents, including the Impeachment Tent, and canopies blew down. Volunteers continued to work long hours after the rally ended to take-down, pack, clean the entire area and unload trucks. The anti-war movement and impeachment movement are growing both numerically and in their organizational capabilities and the tireless work of volunteers forms the core of this success.

Pentagon Prevents People from Joining the Rally

The Pentagon and Virginia State Police, many clad in riot gear, wearing gas masks and wielding batons, blocked people coming from the subway/metro who wanted to attend the demonstration. They also blocked buses from accessing the Pentagon in contravention of the agreements reached in the permit. This required people to walk nearly two miles to get to their buses following the rally.

Many people who came to the rally after it had begun - some who had seen the huge march at a distance as it crossed over the Memorial Bridge across the roadways and wanted to then join the activity - were blocked by the Pentagon and the police from entering the rally site through a maze of misdirection, road closures and threats of arrest at multiple different locations. March organizers worked to get people in and they and their attorneys went to the site of sudden police confrontations and shutdowns, but many people were still unable to get in including the hip-hop artist Immortal Technique who was scheduled to perform.

Ramsey Clark on Impeachment and the War
As Ramsey Clark stated at the Pentagon rally, the effort to Impeach Bush has immediate and long term consequences. The Bush regime is rotting from within. Growing scandals are an indicator. The public revulsion to the endless lies about Iraq has set the stage even more so. Impeachment can and must become a reality and we can do it with your continued support.

Technorati tags: religious right, separation of church and state, jerry falwell, james dobson, pat robertson, christian conservatives, christian coalition, moral majority, focus on the family, fascism, bush, liberal, republican, extraordinary rendition, torture, secret prisons, military commissions act, science, global warming, environment, religion, christianity, unitarian universalism, washington protest, war protest, impeach bush

Washington Post Article Here:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/19/AR2007031900421.html?referrer=email.

Seems like our fight to push Democracy like meth is working great....

More than six in 10 Iraqis now say that their lives are going badly -- double the percentage who said so in late 2005 -- and about half say that increasing U.S. forces in the country will make the security situation worse, according to a poll of more than 2,200 Iraqis conducted for ABC News and other media organizations.

The survey, released Monday, shows that Iraqis' assessments of the quality of their lives and the future of the country have plunged in comparison with similar polling done in November 2005 and February 2004.

Asked to compare their lives today with conditions before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, the proportion of Iraqis who say things are better now has slipped below half for the first time. Forty-two percent say their lives have improved, down from 51 percent in 2005 and 56 percent in 2004. Thirty-six percent now say things in their lives are worse today, up from 29 percent in the 2005 poll, which was taken during a period of relative optimism ahead of parliamentary elections. Twenty-two percent say their lives are about the same.

Here:  House Judiciary Committee

One of my favorites.  There are 1000s of pages here but some are very revealing.  Document 1-3, p. 25.

From: Kyle Sampson
I am only in favor of executing on a plan to push some USAs out if we really are ready and willing to put in the time necessary to select candidates and get them appointed — it will be counterproductive to DOJ operations if we push USAs out and then don’t have replacements ready to roll immediately. In addition, I strongly recommend that, as a matter of Administration policy, we utilize the new statutory provisions that authorize the AG to make USA appointments. We can continue to do selection in JSC, but then should have DOJ take over entirely the vet and appointment. By not going the PAS route. We can give far less deference to home-State Senators and thereby get (1) our preferred person appointed and (2) do it far faster and more efficiently, at less political cost to the White House.

More news on the attorney scandal, the cooperation between Alberto Gonzalez and the White House to fire federal prosecutors for political gain.  A more corrupt administration we could not ask for.  I see Karl Rove's greasy palms sweating in the background as they grasp Gonzalez's ass...

Washington Post:  Iglesias Considered Expert on Voter Fraud - But Fired for not investigating?!

Washington Post:  Retaliation Against Prosecutors

It would seem that the only requirement for getting fired in the federal government these days is to disagree with something the Bush Administraton says or to rightly prosecute criminal Republicans.  CIA agents, attorneys or senators all seem equally susceptible to the smear campaign.

Alberto?  How about "Accountability?"  It would seem a curse word within the White House.  Years roll by before consequences occur to even the most devious and wicked among them.  We spent millions and millions of dollars investigating a (legal) extramarital affair with the last president.  And only now that there are more Democrats than Republicans and public sentiment sways away from Bush do we see serious energy spent on investigating the wrongs that have happened over the last several years, all of which are much, much more serious than sexual conduct with an intern.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez seems to have a knack for doing exactly what the White House wants.  His job should be one in which he counsels the president to do the right thing.  Like upholding the Constitution of the USA.  Instead, he seems yet another tool of the cronyism and 'good ol' boy' system promoted by King Bush.  Did Reno rubber stamp everything Clinton wanted?  No.  By all reports they often disagreed and didn't much like each other.  Bush's ego seems fragile.  He surrounds himself with lackeys and yes-men.

Chief of the yes-men tribe is Alberto Gonzalez.

You want to torture suspected enemies?  No problem, I can condone that and call it legal (snicker, snicker):  Human Rights Groups opposed his nomination or Let's Support the Yes-Man

Strip the Constitution of basic rights and make breaking international law "legal?"  Got that, too.  Gonzalez Approves Military Commissions Act of 2006

From the above article:  Although legal groups are preparing to challenge this bill, that could take a long time to resolve. Furthermore, US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzalez, is in full support of Bush’s anti-terror policies and tactics, and as the Associated Press revealed, Gonzalez has even warned federal judges not to substitute their personal views for the president’s judgments in wartime.

Interestingly, Gonzales is accusing federal judges of using “personal views” if they do not fall in line, and implies that Bush’s judgments do not need questioning—by some of the top experts in the legal field. (It also questions whether Gonzales himself is therefore too unquestioning in his role as US Attorney General.)

Gonzales notes that this is because the President’s judgments are being made during “wartime”. Yet, as argued long ago, to describe to the 9-11 terrorist attacks as an act of war rather than a criminal act allowed the president to declare a potentially never-ending war (and on an idea of terror, rather than against specific terrorist elements), and therefore claim additional powers that would otherwise be more questionable. This most fundamental point is hardly ever questioned.

The previously mentioned New York Times article also notes that, “Over all, the legislation reallocates power among the three branches of government, taking authority away from the judiciary and handing it to the president.” This serious implication of this is summarized by Bruce Ackerman, a professor of law and political science at Yale University, interviewed by the New York Times. He fears that, “If Congress can strip courts of jurisdiction over cases because it fears their outcome, judicial independence is threatened.” In effect, the Act ironically codifies into law the ability for the Bush Administration to act outside the law.

How about making sure the president doesn't have to admit to being arrested:  Gonzalez helped Bush Hide his DUI

Want to work closely with the White House for political gain and make sure we only have people with us who do exactly what we say?  Check.  Rove and Gonzalez Worked Closely to Coordinate

Funny, with how religious Bush professes to be, one would think integrity, ethics, honesty and adhering to the Constitution and International Law would be foremost in his brain.  Odd...I don't recall the bible passage concerning surrounding yourself with yes-men to make sure your own world view is reaffirmed every day...

And an atheist to boot.  I congratulate this Rep. Stark for having the courage to state his religious beliefs in the face of a national public that often wants to hear pat phrases concerning Christian belief systems.  Despite what the authoritarian wackos on the religious right would have us belief, there is no "Christophobia", but rather an underlying assumption that all public officials must be religous and, specifically, Christian.  Granted, this is one of the most liberal and non-fundamental religious sites in America, so we have a long ways to go...

News article:  http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Congressman-Atheism.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Washington Post Article:  Detainee Abuse in Guantanamo

If it seems like I talk about this a lot, I do.  I don't want it forgotten or pushed under the rug.  Though some non-profits, lawyers and others attempt to fight this, most in Congress would rather ignore it.  Until the Military Commissions Act of 2006 is repealed and these prisoners examined and given trials or released, we've got numerous problems in Constitutional law and human rights abuses.

From the article:

U.S. authorities say Mishal's brain was damaged when he tried to hang himself at Guantanamo. But his brother Fahd says a beating by prison guards cut off the flow of oxygen, leaving Mishal unable to walk or talk properly. Fahd said his brother needs intensive physical therapy and costly medicine to control his seizures and hallucinations -- side effects of the injury -- and he wants the U.S. government to help pay for them.

Mishal's family says it is seeking not only financial compensation but also concrete answers from the U.S. government -- either an admission that Mishal was injured by guards or proof that he tried to kill himself. But given the intense secrecy surrounding the detainees at Guantanamo, finding out exactly what occurred that day in 2003 appears almost impossible.

Other interesting data:

Timeline

Detainee Database

View the largest list of names made public thus far, comprising men whose identities have appeared in media reports, on Arabic Web sites and in legal documents.

Funny how James Dobson defends a creep like Newt Gingrich.

The below from Defcon.  Sign up here:  click here to sign up for updates and action alerts.

"When assessing the legacy of Bill Clinton, we can't overlook his shameful sexual behavior in the Oval Office... Indeed, it is my belief that no man has ever done more to debase the presidency or to undermine our Constitution -- and particularly the moral and biblical principles upon which it is based -- than has William Jefferson Clinton."
-James Dobson, discussing President Bill Clinton’s extra-marital affair while in office, January, 2001

In 2001, James Dobson condemned President Clinton for his affair with Monica Lewinsky, saying Clinton had done more than anyone before him to "undermine our Constitution."
Today, Dobson provided a platform on his radio show for former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich to admit to his own extra-marital affair -- at precisely the time he was leading the call for the impeachment of President Clinton. Did Dobson attack Gingrich -- as he did Clinton -- as an enemy of the Constitution, our nation, or even his proclaimed "moral and biblical principles?"
No, he praised Gingrich as a national leader and applauded his "friend's" willingness to discuss such issues on his show.

This double standard cuts to the heart of the religious right's hypocrisy.
Instead of holding their own leaders and allies -- from Ralph Reed to Ted Haggard and Newt Gingrich -- to the standards they attempt to impose on America, they craft excuses and create exceptions.

If ever you needed proof that there is a movement to discount science and the environment within the Christian Right, you only need look at Jerry Falwell and his buddies.  Story here and quoted below:  http://www.wdbj7.com/Global/story.asp?S=6140669&nav=S6aK

I can't say enough about the affect this will have on our entire country if ideas like this take hold within Christian Evangelical movements.  I have confidence that Christians are smart people like everyone else and will recognize the danger here.  After all, if we are "stewards" of the earth (Genesis) then we have an obligation to take care of it.

LYNCHBURG, Va. The Reverend Jerry Falwell says global warming is "Satan's attempt to redirect the church's primary focus" from evangelism to environmentalism.

Falwell told his Baptist congregation in Lynchburg yesterday that "the jury is still out" on whether humans are causing -- or could stop -- global warming.

But he said some "naive Christian leaders" are being "duped" by arguments like those presented in former Vice President Al Gore's documentary "An Inconvenient Truth. Falwell says the documentary should have been titled "A Convenient Untruth."

Falwell said the Bible teaches that God will maintain the Earth until Jesus returns, so Christians should be responsible environmentalists, but not what he calls ... quote ... "first-class nuts."

Greening of Evangelicals Article:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1491-2005Feb5.html

From DefCon (http://www.defconamerica.org/):
If the federal government gives money directly to a religious school or organization in a manner that clearly violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, can anyone sue to stop it? The answer should be obvious: any taxpayer should be able to sue to prevent his or her tax dollars from being used in a manner that is an unconstitutional establishment of religion.

Unfortunately, President Bush and the religious right disagree.

On Wednesday, February 28, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Hein v Freedom from Religion Foundation, a case that threatens to make the federal government completely immune from challenges when it spends money to support religion.
In a 1968 court case, Flast v Cohen, the Supreme Court recognized an exception to the usual rule that a person cannot sue as a taxpayer to stop the spending of money that violates the Constitution. In that case, the Court said that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment was meant to be a limit on Congress's taxing and spending power and that therefore taxpayers do have standing to enforce its commands.

Hein v Freedom from Religion Foundation is a challenge to the Bush administration's unprecedented attempt to funnel money to religious entities providing social services. In his first days as President, George W. Bush created an Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives for the purpose of giving money to religious institutions. The question is whether a taxpayer can bring a challenge to this as violating the Establishment Clause.

It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will reaffirm Flast v Cohen and allow taxpayers to challenge this effort to support religion with federal tax dollars. But there is a real possibility that the Court could narrow or even overrule Flast.

If that happens, then there would be no way to sue to stop the federal government from giving any form of assistance to churches, synagogues, mosques, or other religious entities. The Establishment Clause could be ignored by the federal government and no one could stop it.

This possibility reaffirms the importance of our nations's commitment to the seperation of church and state and our fight against the relgious right's war on this American principle.
Sincerely,
Erwin Chemerinsky
DefCon advisory board member
Alston & Bird Professor of Law and Political Science, Duke University.

P.S. Stay tuned to the DefCon Blog for updates on this case and the Court's final decision.

News story at Democracy Now:  Democracy Now: Federal Court Ruling on Torture

The blip:

U.S. Court Tosses Out Suit Over CIA Torture
A U.S. federal appeals court has ruled a lawsuit over the CIA's secret prisons and use of torture can not go forward because it would expose government state secrets. The German citizen Khaled el Masri sued the CIA after he was kidnapped in Macedonia and flown to Afghanistan. El Masri was held for five months in a secret prison where he says he was drugged, beaten and interrogated. Anthony Romero of the American Civil Liberties Union said “With today's ruling, the state secrets doctrine has become a shield that covers even the most blatant abuses of power.” Meanwhile the German newspaper Der Spiegel is reporting that senior US diplomats are pressuring German officials not to go ahead with a related case. German officials recently issued arrest warrants for 13 suspected CIA agents for their role in the kidnapping of El-Masri.