Update: National Applications Office Status

It appears that the mainstream media has finally decided to start covering the National Applications Office, the office the Bush administration and friends have been trying to open as a part of the new Department of Homeland Security. Its main function, if the Bush administration wins, will be to use military satellites for domestic law enforcement (for more details, read this).

The National Applications Office grand opening has been delayed several times now due largely to the efforts made by Rep. Jane Harmon of California. On June 25th, Newsweek gave us this update:

On Tuesday, the House Appropriations Committee approved an amendment denying money for the new domestic intelligence operation—cryptically named the "National Applications Office"—until the Homeland Security secretary certifies that any programs undertaken by the center will "comply with all existing laws, including all applicable privacy and civil liberties standards."

Rep. Jane Harman, a California Democrat who chairs the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on intelligence, told Newsweek that majorities in both the House and Senate intend to block all funding for the domestic intelligence center at least until August, when the Government Accountability Office, an investigative agency that works for Congress, completes a report examining civil-liberties and privacy issues related to the domestic use of picture-taking spy satellites...

A Homeland Security official said that the administration had hoped to begin full operations of the National Applications Office, which would be located at a secret facility somewhere in the Washington, D.C., area, in October. But Harman said that full congressional funding for the new center almost certainly would be held up until after the presidential election in November.

While I'm thankful that Rep. Jane Harmon has been on top of this issue and is actively shutting it down (for now), the fact that it is Jane Harmon doing the squashing scares me. The reason is that Jane Harmon is the Congressional representative for Torrance and El Segundo, CA which she describes as "satellite central". And yet, despite the fact that she represents "satellite central", whose financial interests would benefit from the opening of the National Applications Office, she is still putting her foot down.

Why?

As the representative for companies such as Boeing, Raytheon, Northrup Grumman and other huge military industrial complex institutions, she has access to view and understand these technologies and she said in a 2007 hearing that the capabilities of these satellites give her great concern (watch her testimony about her concerns here). This doesn't surprise me. Look at the type of detail us peasants can now access by signing onto Google maps or Mapquest. Can you even imagine what kind of capabilities our military has?

And they want to use these things to watch us. Even the satellite companies' own representative doesn't want to see that happen.

So we're safe for now. It might be a good idea to give your Congressman and Senators a buzz to let them know to keep up the good work on this one.

"W" Trailer

I'll be there. Will you?

House Hearing on Executive Power

This morning, I woke up far too early and watched the House Judiciary Committee hearing titled “Executive Power and Its Constitutional Limitations”. In the same way that The Sports Guy at ESPN.com will write down his thoughts while watching sports, I have done the same thing with the hearing. There was some good information provided today, especially by my intellectual crush, Bruce Fein. As the Republicans accused, this hearing was very much a referendum on impeachment. Let’s hope it is the first of many.

Throughout this script, I have included clips from CSPAN. When you click on them, it will bring you to the same screen, but click on the big red circle on the right side of your screen and the clip should play. For those that don't feel like reading, here is a collection of my favorite clips:

Bruce Fein's opening statement

Vincent Bugliosi's opening statement

Smirking Jeremy Rabkin's opening statement - a trip to the looney bin

How to get rid of "executive privilege" claims

Bruce Fein: Why withholding information in matters of war is an impeachable offense

The evidence that Bush mislead Congress about Iraq's threat- MUST WATCH

You will also notice that I mostly refer to the members of Congress with only their names. I have also chosen not to include a D or R next to their names. I do this for two reasons 1) laziness. I don’t want to type ‘Congressman’ and ‘Congresswoman’ a thousand times along with their political party association but also 2) the title seems to give the people a validity and respect that they often don’t deserve based on their actions and performance in their positions. I want us to judge these individuals as their bosses and therefore I have dropped the titles that imply that they are our superiors.

All times in EST.

10:02 – Dennis Kucinich and his gorgeous wife walk in to huge applause. I’ve never seen that at a hearing.

10:09 – I can hear chanting but it sounds distant and I don’t see any pink shirts (There are a group of women from Code Pink that are regulars at just about every hearing). Are they chanting, “Let us in?”

10:10- The Voice of CSPAN announced that Bruce Fein is going to be one of the witnesses. This is awesome because Bruce Fein is a Republican lawyer who favors impeachment because he actually gives a damn about the law. I believe he was part of the Nixon administration. I’m excited to see him talk to the Republicans. I wonder if they will treat him with the same condescension that they are sure to give to Dennis Kucinich.

10:14 – Ok- correction… Bruce Fein was the Deputy Attorney General for the Reagan Administration and specializes in constitutional law. The Voice also just rattled off the other witnesses, but I can’t type that fast. Here’s the list from the House Judiciary Committee website:

Witness List - Panel I:

Hon. Dennis Kucinich
U.S. House of Representatives - 10th District, OH

Hon. Maurice Hinchey US House of Representatives - 22nd District, NY

Hon. Walter Jones
US House of Representatives - 3rd District, NC

Hon. Brad Miller
US House of Representatives - 13th District, NC

Panel II:

Hon. Elizabeth Holtzman
Former US House of Representatives - 16th District, NY
Department of Justice

Hon. Bob Barr
Former US House of Representatives - 7th District, GA
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Hon. Ross C. "Rocky" Anderson
Founder and President - High Road for Human Rights

Stephen Presser
Raoul Berer Professor of Legal History - Northwestern University School of Law

Bruce Fein
Associate Deputy Attorney General, 1981-1982
Chairman, American Freedom Agenda

Vincent Bugliosi
Author and Former Los Angeles County Prosecutor

Jeremy A. Rabkin
Professor of Law - George Mason University School of Law

Elliott Adams
President of the Board - Veterans for Peace

Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr.
Senior Counsel - Brennen Center for Justice at NYU School of Law

Bob Barr? Is that the same Bob Barr running for President as a Libertarian?

10:20 – Yes

10:21 – Hearing just started. Congressman John Conyers (chairman of the House Judiciary Committee) is awesome for calling this hearing, but he has the excitement of a goldfish. Or maybe it’s just 4am here in Hawaii and I’m grouchy.

10:24 – In his opening statement, John Conyers spoke about the contempt charges that the Judiciary Committee brought up against Harriet Miers, Josh Bolton, and charges they intend to bring up against Karl Rove. But what’s the point of bragging about those actions if those people are all still able to watch this on their living room televisions just like you and me? Their asses should be in jail or else those charges are meaningless.

10:27 – Lamar Smith just called this an “anger management class” and said “there is no evidence to support impeachment”. He dismisses this entire process as being done because Democrats just don’t like the President. Of course this jerkoff represents Texas.

10:30 – I could have typed half of Lamar Smith’s opening statement as shameless statements of Team Republican bullshit. I’m guessing that urge will appear more during Republican questions during this hearing. I’m going to try to control myself and try to avoid calling more Congressman words like “jerkoff”. God help me keep my cool.

10:37 – Steve King of Iowa is calling this an impeachment hearing and is saying that he never imagined that this would happen because the Bush administration has done nothing to warrant it. First of all, I hope this is the first of many impeachment hearings. Second, if Steve King of Iowa didn’t see this coming, he’s a moron. So much for self control.

10:40- What is he even talking about? I love how Republicans pick some random detail in some random report and hammer into it to avoid talking about anything substantial.

10:41 – John Conyers: reminded Steve King that this is not an impeachment hearing because the House of Representatives has not voted on it, passed it, and sent it to the House Judiciary Committee. A stickler to the details, that Conyers.

10:45 – Dan Lungren never fails to make my blood boil. Will the residents of Elk Grove, Folsom, and Sutter Creek in California please get this guy out of our Congress?

10:51 – Jerrold Nadler just made a great point in response to the Republicans which was that these hearings are exercises of Congress’ and the Judiciary Committee’s power, power which is diminished when such hearings are so easily dismissed. That is so true. These Republicans are stripping themselves of their personal power in this government when they refuse to exercise oversight over the Executive Branch. Obviously the shameless Team Republican member Mike Pence didn’t get the “You are diminishing your own power!” memo. He also is baffled that anyone could find fault in President George W. Bush’s actions.

10:56- The award for being the first to bring up 9/11 goes to...

Mike Pence of Indiana!

10:57 – Is everyone on this committee going to give an opening statement? Jeez…

11:02 – Sheila Jackson Lee is waving around her pocket Constitution. That’s cute. I’m not being sarcastic.

11:03- Trent Franks just said that if this is not an impeachment hearing then he hopes that none of the witnesses will even mention it. That’s cute. I’m being very sarcastic.

11:05 – Trent Franks: Be afraid of terrorists! They want nuclear weapons! You need a President who is willing to sacrifice his popularity to protect you! Ew…

11:07: Steve Cohen just brought up the fact that Monica Goodling would only testify after being granted immunity and said that innocent people don’t usually request immunity. In blondie’s defense, I doubt she knowingly did anything wrong. My guess is that she just didn’t know and wanted to be covered. After all, she did get her law degree from Jesus Camp. The point is that she came forward and testified. The Democrats might be wise not to shit all over the people who have agreed to cooperate with them.

11:13 – Does Hank Johnson have a birthmark under his chin or is that a weird light reflection?

11:14 – Could Hank Johnson possibly talk slower? No wonder people don’t watch CSPAN.

11:18 – Tammy Baldwin. I’m 90% sure she was one of the three Judiciary Committee members who were pushing to get impeachment hearings against VP Dick Cheney. She had a good opening statement, but again, a boring delivery. The Republicans definitely win in the political theatre competition.

11:20 – One hour of Congressional opening statements and still going. I can see it now. They are going to have to cut the second panel questioning short because they are going to run out of time. I wonder why that happens so often…

11:25 – Ok, time for witness opening statements. Finally.

11:26 – Dennis Kucinich is such an amazing Congressman and I’m so thankful to have him up there on the hill. That said, I really wish he didn’t look like a cartoon character. If he looked like Pierce Brosnan, I think this country would take him seriously. How sad is that?

11:34 – Witness Maurice Hinchey (former Congressman) is talking about how the Bush administration failed to act on warnings about 9/11. I honestly didn’t think anyone would bring that up but I’m glad it is going to be addressed. Good on him.

11:36 – There are two women visible over Maurice Hinchey’s shoulder. One is the beautiful and classy Elizabeth Kucinich, looking stunning as usual. The other is some blond girl with a sloppy French braid who has yawned about 30 times. More often than not there is some goofball in the crowd that I can’t stop watching. I think French braid girl… we’ll call her Frenchy… is going to be that goofball today.

11:41 – “Democracy dies behind closed doors” – Congressman Brad Miller

11:49 – I just got up to make a turkey sandwich and saw that my mayo expires on February 4, 2009. George W. Bush, barring some emergency declaration, he will be out of office before my mayonnaise expires. How cool is that?

11:52 - HR 5993 is a bill Walter Jones is talking about which would require (among other things) that Executive signing statements be public and that the Executive would have to testify as to why the statement has been added in order for it to be valid. He also said that John McCain has promised to never use signing statements if elected and Barack Obama has yet to say the same.

11:55 – Oh my God… they are getting opening statements from the second panel right now too. This is ridiculous. Are we ever going to get to the hearing?

11:57- I didn’t know that John Conyers was on the House Judiciary Committee during the Nixon impeachment hearings. So many of our Congressman, as much as I like John Conyers, have been serving for far too long.

12:03 – Elizabeth Holtzman is a former Congresswoman and is on the second panel. If I were to peg anyone as likely to bite a Republican’s head off, she would (so far) be my best bet.

12:06 – Bob Barr was the US House manager during 1998 impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton, was a Republican while in Congress from 1995-2003, and is of the opinion that the Bush Executive branch has taken abuses of the separation of powers to a “new and unprecedented level”. It is Republicans like Bob Barr that will turn the tide of this Congress. This is something I intend to write about in the next few days, but the Brad Blog is reporting that Karl Rove is threatening a man named Mike Connell and his family telling them that if Mike Connell does not take the fall for the election fraud in Ohio in 2004 that Rove will have Connell’s wife prosecuted. It’s when they start to panic and turn on each other that the chips begin to fall. Every Republican that speaks against the Bush administration’s abuses of power is worth 50 Democrats in my mind. Just as the United States will only be destroyed from within, the same goes for Team Republican.

12:20 – Two hours of opening statements

12:21 – I just popped over to CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, the Huffington Post websites to see what their headlines are. On every website, the headline is about Barack Obama’s trip to Europe. On none of those pages is this hearing mentioned in a prominent position, if at all. I’m not surprised about the first three “mainstream” sites, but I’m actually a little surprised at The Huffington Post. They are more and more drinking the Kool-aid that they were initially created to be the antidote for.

12:31 – Bruce Fein is pissed and it’s only his opening statement. I love it! (CLIP)

12:34 – I didn’t see this coming… Vincent Bugliosi, the former Los Angeles prosecutor, just read into the Congressional record that he has evidence enough to convict the President and others in his administration for first-degree murder of the over 4,000 soldiers who have died fighting the Iraq war and the 100,000 recorded Iraqi deaths that resulted because of Bush’s war. (CLIP - Note the applause and Lamar “jerkoff” Smith’s attempt to have the room cleared)

12:41 – A witness asked to appear by the Republicans is Jeremy Rabkin. He’s a law professor from George Mason University, a school I've only heard of because their basketball team made it way further than they were supposed to in the NCAA tournament a few years ago. I’ll just list the ways he’s pissing me off. 1) He is referring to the destruction of the 4^th amendment (the recent passage of telecom immunity commonly referred to as FISA) as a “secondary issue”, saying that if people believe that Bush lied us into war, we shouldn’t be concerned with “secondary issues”. 2) He’s a smirking little shit and is using sarcasm instead of legal arguments to make his points. 3) He is praising the Bush administration because there have been no more terrorist attacks here since 9/11 despite the fact that 9/11 happened during the Bush administration. 4) He’s calling the people in the hearing- audience members, Congressmen, and witnesses who are angry- “demented”. Here's a CLIP of this for you guys, but it’s not a “must see”. This one is more for entertainment than anything else.

12:51 – If we ever get to the Q&A portion of this hearing, I think the second panel will be the most fun.

12:58 – Elizabeth Holtzman is saying that impeachment is the only remedy to an Executive branch out of control because there is no executive privilege with impeachment. She said that while there is a good chance that they won’t be able to finish the task, they can start the task and at least set the precedent that there are repercussions for ignoring the law (totally paraphrasing). I think she is right that the key is to take away the claim of executive privilege and – this is just me saying this- to take away George W. Bush’s power to pardon his co-conspirators. The only way the Constitution allows presidential pardons to be stripped is when “in cases of impeachment”.

1:04 – Fox News has the hearing up on their website. CNN, MSNBC, & Huffington… shame on you. Scooped by Fox!

1:06 – Frenchy’s gone. Or maybe she’s just asleep. Put into a coma by almost 3 hours of opening statements.

1:09 – Bruce Fein, responding to the argument that all Presidents have broken the law during wartime, said that this is different because this war is permanent. The conditions for the end of this war is when no one in the world threatens an American with a terrorist act, which will never happen, therefore that argument is invalid (CLIP). It’s scary to think that Bush has created a permanent war situation for us but considering that both McCain and Obama have promised to keep focusing on the “War on Terror”, permanent war does appear to be our future.

1:14 – I think John Conyers just kicked Cindy Sheehan out of the courtroom. He said “Sheehan. Out.” I didn’t see her face or anything though, so don’t quote me on this.

1:15 – 2 hours and 58 minutes of opening statements. First round of questions goes to Lamar “jerkoff” Smith. Looks like panel #2 will be up first. Sweet.

1:20 – Ok, so apparently we are going to re-visit the Clinton impeachment again. Jerkoff is trying to get the panel members to fight with each other.

1:23 – Jeremy Rabkin – the Republican’s smirking witness who was pissing me off at 12:41- just said that no one has even tried to explain why they believe the President lied about the pretenses for going to war, but if those charges were found to be true, those would be impeachable offenses. No one has tried to explain that, huh? How about the people sitting next to you (the former Congresswoman and the former Assistant District Attorney of Los Angeles) that have written books on the subject? Their books are on the table you are sitting at. Maybe they will let you borrow them. He then went on to call everyone concerned with the rule of law “demented” again and said that everyone is “bitter” because the election is going to be very, very close again and emotions are running high. Shameless.

1:32 – Jerrold Nadler asked Bruce Fein about executive privilege. Apparently, executive privilege does not apply in impeachment hearings. Nadler’s question was that considering the Bush administration has already instructed staffers to not show up for testimony, etc., what would stop them from asserting executive privilege anyway? Bruce Fein said that during the Nixon impeachment hearings, they tried to do just that. Congress, in that instance, is able to then file an article of impeachment on that subject because it is against the law to assert executive privilege during impeachment, and then he could be removed from office. (CLIP)

1:36 – Where’s the sound? Bruce Fein is still talking but we can’t hear him.

1:37 – It’s back. Jerrold Nadler asked Elizabeth Holtzman how she recommends they get the Republicans to come around in the highly partisan atmosphere the current Congress has to deal with (she was involved in the Nixon impeachment which was made possible because of the Republicans that came to their senses). Her answer was that it was the American people who demanded it after the Saturday night massacre. She said that during the hearings, they brought people along by having fair proceedings. The fair proceedings part we can do nothing about, but it seems to me that a game plan for us regular Americans might be to start applying pressure via daily emails and phone calls to the Republican members of the Judiciary Committee. The Democrats seem to be with us already. The Republicans, while it is very true that they will be initially unwilling to listen, are all up for re-election this year (the entire House is up for re-election). Maybe the prospect of getting kicked out of office will make them think twice about continuing to protect President Bush. In fact, I’m going to go back through this before I publish and give phone numbers for some of these people (home offices because Congress is about to go on vacation). Let’s start pressuring them right now.

1:45 – Steve King is saying he has yet to be informed of the holes in the claim that Saddam Hussien sought significant portions of yellowcake urianium from Africa. The hole was provided by Joe Wilson, the husband of Valerie Plame who was outed as a covert CIA agent because her husband went public with the information he found investigating that claim in Africa. Does Steve King (202-225-4426) take us all for idiots?

1:51 – Bobby Scott‘s question is basically, ‘How do we get witnesses to show up if they won’t listen to us?’. Easy. Throw the ones who break the law in jail using the power of inherent contempt and/or impeach their boss who ordered them not to show up (impeach their boss was basically Bruce Fein’s answer). My God… these Democrats are such weenies.

1:56 – Elizabeth Holtzman: "Congress can pass all the statutes that it wants but a President that feels he is above the law can just ignore them…the only remedy for a President that feels he is above the law is impeachment. You can’t run away from that." (this is close to an exact quote)

1:59 – Vincent Bugliosi (former Los Angeles Assistant District Attorney)– the President has temporary immunity from prosecution while in office. However, once he leaves office, he can be prosecuted for any crimes he committed while in office. Bugliosi specifically wants George W. Bush to be indicted for murder upon leaving office on January 20.

2:06 – Another Republican Congressman giving questions on the Constitution to smirking Jeremy Rabkin instead of Bruce Fein. Smirking Jeremy Rabkin said that “Clearly, the worst President was James Buchannan who allowed the country to fall apart on his watch.” Ha! Seen our economy lately?

2:09 – “If the President and the Attorney General are protecting me from terrorism, who is protecting me from them?” – Congressman Mel Watt (this line got another applause)

2:16 – Mel Watt – Democrat – sucks. Despite all the arguments he heard today, despite all the letters he says he has received from constituents that want impeachment, and despite his own quote, Watt says he doesn’t support moving forward. He used the “it’s a distraction” argument. Distraction from what? America’s Next Top President? His bottom line is that he wants “the American people to impeach this President in November.” I hope the 12^th district of North Carolina impeaches you for failing to uphold the Constitution. Here’s his phone number in Charlotte: (704) 344-9950 and Greensboro: (336) 275-9950. Give him hell, neighbors.

2:21 – Louie Gohmert – is he seriously blaming Bush lying about the weapons of mass destruction on Bill Clinton? Louie Gohmert, representing Team Republican thanks to the residents of Tyler and Longview in Texas. Here’s his toll free number in Tyler: (866) 535-6302

2:30 – Frederick Schwartz (lawyer) just suggested a “truth commission” in the likeness of the 9/11 commission, where citizens appointed by the President and Congress look into the lawlessness of the Bush administration. Can we please stop allowing the Bush administration determine who will be in charge of investigating them? This airhead Democratic Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren seems to think a bogus “truth commission” is a good idea. We already know more than we need to know in order to know for certain that the President broke the law! Ever wonder why the Democrats as a whole seem like a bunch of pansies? It’s because they have parts like Zoe Lofgren, who represents San Jose and the Silicon Valley in California. Her number: (408) 271-8700.

2:38 – Mutiny in the courtroom! They just removed a soldier from the crowd, some Asian guy just started screaming and was escorted out, people are being kicked out for wearing t-shirts, and the entire crowd looks furious. John Conyers actually looks amused.

2:42 – Smirking Jeremy Rabkin just reminded everyone that the President doesn’t work alone. He said that of everyone is so worried about things like FISA, they could impeach the Attorney General and others. Dan Lungren was giving his witness a classic look that basically said, ‘Shut up! Shut up! Shut up!’. As sick as this doofus makes me, he does have a point, and I think Lungren knows it. This clip is not exactly newsworthy, but Dan Lungren’s facial expressions are priceless (CLIP).

2:47 – Bruce Fein: the founding fathers intended withholding information from Congress to be an impeachable offense. Fein said that the power to declare war is obviously corrupted if the President is able to control the information flow and can edit out parts of the story. The fact that President Bush did so, withholding parts of the story from Congress which guided them to believe the threat Iraq posed to be greater than the whole story would have guided them to believe, is an impeachable offense. (CLIP)

2:53 – Vincent Bugliosi (Los Angeles prosecutor)- The descents that are in the classified document regarding Iraq were deleted from the packet of information that was given to Congress. THIS IS A MUST WATCH CLIP

3:08 – “It’s up to Congress whether or not it will let its power slip through its fingers” – Ross “Rocky” Anderson (former Mayer of Salt Lake City).

3:10 – Bruce Fein – Attorney General Mukasey’s refusal to enforce the Congressional subpoenas is an impeachable offense

3:17 – Bruce Fein – the President’s impeachable offenses are “open and notorious” and it wouldn’t require a long investigation to impeach and remove him from office.

3:23 – Hank Johnson is putting pressure on Stephen Presser (Northwestern law professor), the other witness that has been supporting the Republican line that impeachment hearings are not warranted. He’s another smirker. Under what rock do the Republicans find these law professors?

3:35 – Tammy Baldwin - (almost an exact quote) “I have serious concerns about the similarities between the actions and rhetoric of this administration in the run up to the war in Iraq and the actions and rhetoric of this administration regarding Iran.” Me too, sista.

3:43 – Totally not related to this hearing, but did you guys hear that John Edwards has been caught by the National Enquirer meeting up with his mistress and bastard child at some hotel? Anyone a bit happier that he’s not the Democratic nominee now?

3:47 – President Bush has issued almost 1,100 signing statements onto laws passed by Congress.

3:48 - Frederick Schwartz (Senior Council at NYU School of Law) -President Bush’s signing statements are both unprecedented in their volume and their audacity

3:51 – Bruce Fein – Congress can refuse to appropriate money to the enforcement of laws that contain a signing statement, therefore forcing the President to take the law in its entirety or not at all.

4:06 – Dan Lungren is accusing the Democrats of intimidating witnesses. I have sat here and watched this hearing for over 6 hours now and I have not seen a single instance of witness intimidation.

4:12 – Jerold Nadler is laughing at Dan Lungren now. Good. I have to wonder why they even bother talking to him.

4:13 – The hearing is adjourned.

The Attorney General & Executive Privilege

On Wednesday, July 23, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing during which the committee questioned our current Attorney General Micheal Mukasey. As the media was too busy covering America's Next Top President, there were a few questions and answers that I would like my few readers to know about.

First, Congressman Robert Wexler of Florida (view the clip here - click red flash button on the right) brought up a meeting that FBI agents had with Vice President Dick Cheney during which the Vice President was asked about his involvement in the outing of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame (her deliberate public outing was a felony). Congress has requested the transcripts from the Justice Department but have been denied access because Attorney General Mukasey said that the FBI interviews of Vice President Cheney were "internal White House deliberations" and thus exempt from congressional oversight. Congressman Wexler asked for Attorney General Mukasey's definition of "internal White House deliberations" but Mukasey instead gave his definition of what qualifies for executive privilege. He said executive privilege covers "deliberations between the president and those immediately around him and the gathering of information by him for the purpose of making decisions". Congressman Wexler then went on to ask, "Whether or not the VP participated in a scheme to out a CIA agent, would that be covered by executive privilege?"

Attorney General Micheal Mukasey's answer was, "In the abstract, no."

The point? The Attorney General knows there are limits to the claims of executive privilege, as he should. This tells me that when he defends bogus claims of executive privilege, like he did to Congresswoman Linda Sanchez, that he's lying.

Congresswoman Linda Sanchez of California addressed Karl Rove's refusal to appear before Congress for the second time using a claim of executive privilege (view the clip here). She reminded the Attorney General that even if a witness called before Congress wants to use executive privilege in order to refuse to answer a question, that person still needs to show up. She also reminded the Attorney General that the subpeona which Karl Rove blew off was issued to compel his testimony about former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman's case, which took place in Alabama and involved conversations between Karl Rove and political operatives and Justice Department officials... conversations that, as far was we know, did not involve the President. Attorney General Mukasey's answer was that the subject of whether or not an adviser to the president needs to show up in response to a Constitutional subpeona is currently before a district judge and it is not appropriate for him to comment.

Which is stupid on two levels. First of all, as explained by Jonathon Turley, a constitutional lawyer, "there is no justification for the failure to appear" before Congress when subpoenaed. Second, the Attorney General out ranks a district judge. Considering that the law is clear, the Attorney General has no justifiable reason not to comment.

The reason I'm writing about this today is that there is a hearing tomorrow in the House Judiciary Committee titled " Executive Power and Its Constitutional Limitations" and I believe these answers given by our shameless Attorney General are going to be brought up.

The House Judiciary Committee is a group of Congressman we should all be watching very closely because they hold the key to holding the Bush administration accountable for their lawlessness. Earlier this month, Congressman Dennis Kucinich introduced "a "privileged resolution"... calling on the House to look at whether President Bush should be removed from office for lying to Congress and the American public when he sought congressional approval back in 2002 for taking military action to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein."

In an about face on the subject, Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently hinted that impeachment hearings are no longer "off the table" and hearings could be held in the House Judiciary Committee. If we have any chance of getting this President out of office, or achieving my more realistic goal of having him stripped of his power of the presidential pardon, the House Judiciary Committee is the group of people that must take the first step. This hearing on executive privilege tomorrow may getter us closer to those impeachment hearings. I hope I'm not the only person who will be watching tomorrow, Friday July 25th at 10am EST.

"Money is what it is all about."

I have been blissfully out of the loop lately but have had some stories pop up on my radar that I want to be sure everyone is aware of. First up, the fate of earth.

The North Pole Ice Might Disappear This Year

The fact that the ice at the North Pole might disappear is something we have heard about for a few years now. What is changing are the predictions in regards to the timing.

To put this in some perspective, when Al Gore’s movie An Inconvenient Truth was released in 2006, scientists said that the polar ice might be gone by 2050. By May 2007, they updated that prediction to say that the ice might melt completely by 2020. That prediction has been updated once again to a "greater than 50/50" chance that the arctic might melt this summer.

Why do we care? Because when the ice is gone, that big white sheet isn't going to be up there on the top of this globe to reflect sunlight back into outer space. That means more sunlight and heat will be absorbed by the ocean. That means the ocean will get warmer. That means that whatever is happening right now is going to be accelerated. What that means? I'm not terribly excited to find out.

Dare I suggest that we might want to shift our thinking away from “combating” climate change to preparing for it? I’m not so sure we can do much to stop it now.

Bush Administration Preventing Alternative Energy

Despite the revelation that Santa might be swimming with his reindeer this year, the Bush administration is continuing to defy all logic, abandon all reasoning, and exhibit a complete lack of concern for humanity by stonewalling any attempt by Americans to move away from oil and towards sustainable energy. As usual, they have been amazingly effective in their quest.

They have proved this on two fronts in the last few weeks. First, they are (once again) censoring scientists because their conclusions do not match the Bush administration’s oil profiteering will. From a post written by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Brendan DeMelle on the Huffington Post:

The White House is working to block the Environmental Protection Agency from publishing a document which outlines how the government could regulate global warming emissions under the Clean Air Act while benefiting the economy. The document is based on a multi-year, multimillion-dollar study by EPA and its findings could ultimately serve as a legal roadmap for regulating U.S. global warming emissions.

That is, until it faced review by the White House's Office of Management and Budget. Bush's OMB is demanding that EPA delete sections of the document that outline how greenhouse gas emissions could be regulated, delete any references asserting that emissions endanger public welfare, and delete an analysis of the benefits to the economy of regulating greenhouse gases here and abroad.

The OMB instead wants the document to suggest that the Clean Air Act is ineffective and that greenhouse gases should be regulated under new legislation. The draft is effectively being held hostage until EPA makes OMB's changes, since the White House must approve a final draft before EPA can release the document publicly.

The draft EPA document confirms that fuel efficiency could be improved to well above 35 miles per gallon by 2020; CO2 emissions could easily be regulated through the government-permit process and through a cap-and-trade system similar to existing programs for acid rain and mercury; and that overall, the regulations would be beneficial to the U.S. economy.

"The net benefit to society could be in excess of $2 trillion," according to the draft document.

But just as you might conclude that the Bush administration has no respect for science, they decided that we desperately need a scientific study to make sure that we are protecting the environment from… yes, you guessed it… solar panels.

CITING NEED FOR ASSESSMENTS, U.S. FREEZES SOLAR ENERGY PROJECTS

Faced with a surge in the number of proposed solar power plants, the federal government has placed a moratorium on new solar projects on public land until it studies their environmental impact, which is expected to take about two years.

The Bureau of Land Management says an extensive environmental study is needed to determine how large solar plants might affect millions of acres it oversees in six Western states — Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah.

But the decision to freeze new solar proposals temporarily, reached late last month, has caused widespread concern in the alternative-energy industry, as fledgling solar companies must wait to see if they can realize their hopes of harnessing power from swaths of sun-baked public land, just as the demand for viable alternative energy is accelerating.

“It doesn’t make any sense,” said Holly Gordon, vice president for legislative and regulatory affairs for Ausra, a solar thermal energy company in Palo Alto, Calif. “The Bureau of Land Management land has some of the best solar resources in the world. This could completely stunt the growth of the industry.

But that’s exactly the point.

Cheney’s Company (KBR) Knowingly Allowed Troops to be Poisoned

In case any one is still cloudy on this, KBR is the bastard child of Halliburton, the war profiteering company that is closely tied to Vice President Dick Cheney (close as in Cheney used to be Halliburton's CEO and he still holds a shit-ton of their stock). They apparently allowed our soldiers to be exposed to the same chemical that made all those people sick in the true to life movie Erin Brokovich.

Also from the Huffington Post:

Defense contractor KBR is accused of knowingly exposing U.S. troops to sodium dichromate, a potentially lethal, carcinogenic chemical. KBR failed to warn 250 U.S. soldiers assigned to guard a crucial part of Iraq's oil infrastructure that the chemical was present all over the site. Witnesses, including a former KBR employee responsible for health and safety at the site, testified at a Capitol Hill hearing this week that many of the exposed soldiers were "bleeding from the nose, spitting blood," and getting sick while guarding the plant.

Scientific studies show that even short-term exposure to sodium dichromate - the same chemical that poisoned residents in Hinkley, CA made famous in the movie "Erin Brockovich" - can cause cancer and harm the liver and immune system, among other impacts.

Witnesses at the hearing testified that KBR supervisors initially told the soldiers that sodium dichromate was a "mild irritant," but finally acknowledged that the chemical was a potentially deadly substance and moved to clean up the site once soldiers starting getting ill.

How’s that for supporting the troops?

Big Business Close to Getting Immunity for Splitter Cabinets, But There is Hope

This photo is of the actual splitter cabinet room at AT&T in San Francisco. Click on "splitter cabinet" to find out how it's copying your phone calls, emails, and internet searches and sending them to Bush's government.

I’m sure most people who follow this stuff already know that the House of Representatives passed the ridiculous FISA not-a-compromise that would give telecommunications companies a “Get Out of Lawsuits Free” card for helping the government spy on every single one of us. What I’m not so sure people know about is that there is still hope that this immunity might not happen.

The first time Congress tried to get this lemon squeezed through the Senate, Senator Chris Dodd shot his own presidential campaign in the foot by leaving Iowa and filibustering the bill (Go Chris Dodd!). Now he is trying to get the text which grants that immunity he sacrificed his campaign for taken out of the FISA bill when it goes to the Senate.

Now I know people are pissed at Barack Obama for supporting the not-a-compromise, but he wrote a post in which he says he’s working with Chris Dodd to get rid of the immunity line. May I suggest we offer these guys some encouragement? After all, isn’t the removal of immunity all that we are asking for right now?

Also, when will someone - anyone- in the "mainstream media" report on the damn splitter cabinets? Chris Dodd read the information Mark Klein gave into the congressional record during his filibuster. All of Congress and the media in Washington should know about them. May I suggest that us bloggers maybe write some posts explaining the splitter cabinets? That could help us get people to wake up to the implications of this immunity thing.

Our Money Isn’t Exactly Safe in the Bank

While there is no “breaking news!” in this post at DistributorCap NY, DCap has once again explained some very complicated economic stuff in a way economiphobics like myself can understand.

Seriously, read this.

Basic gist though: if you think that all your money is safe when a bank fails because of your FDIC protection, you may want to know what the FDIC really is and what the Bush administration is doing with it.

I also feel it might be useful to know about this blogger who writes the Daily Pfennig. Chuck Butler

is the President of Everbank. Everbank is based out of Florida and allows you to buy foreign currency CD's for $10,000 each. Most of the time it costs $100,000 or more to ditch the dollar but this guy's bank is letting some of smaller fish have a chance. I'll let you know right up front that I don't know a damn thing about economics. I cheated my way through high school Econ just like everybody else.

But I like this bank because I read it's President's daily blog. You can really get a sense of how the company will run by being able to find out what is going on in the head of the man in charge.

Blast from the Past – Remember the Anthrax letters?

Remember after September 11^th but before the Patriot Act was passed ,when we were all still really freaked out from the attacks, and somebody sent letters filled with deadly poisonous anthrax to certain people around the country? Well, 7 years later, Jill at Brilliant at Breakfast reminded me of who received those letters and in hindsight, the list paints a telling picture:

Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle. Daschle's letter was opened by an aide.

Democratic Senator and head of the Senate Judiciary Committee Patrick Leahy. Leahy's letter had been misdirected to the State Department and had been opened by a postal worker.

NBC news anchor Tom Brokaw. Brokaw's letter was opened by Erin O'Connor, an assistant to Brokaw. O'Connor developed cutaneous anthrax.

Individuals who were at ABC and CBS headquarters also developed cutaneous anthrax.

Robert Stevens, photo editor at the National Enquirer. A mailroom clerk named Ernesto Blanco was also sickened. The anthrax envelope was addressed to "Photo Editor", and was received in October 2001 after the Enquirer had run an article and this photograph of a falling-down-drunk Jenna Bush the previous August..

The offices of The New York Post, which would seem to be an unlikely target, were it not for these headline stories about the Bush twins that had appeared during 2001:

BOOZING BUSH TWIN NEARLY IN THE CLEAR
Deborah Orin; New York Post; Sep 7, 2001; pg. 015

BUSH TWINS' BOOZE SERVER OFF THE HOOK
AP; New York Post; Jun 24, 2001; pg. 012

BUSTED BUSH BABES MAKE DIFFERENT BOOZE PLEAS
MARILYN RAUBER Post Correspondent; New York Post; Jun 9, 2001; pg. 002

REIN IN THESE BUSH LEAGUERS
LINDA STASI; New York Post; Jun 3, 2001; pg. 002

DOUBLE SHOT: BUSH TWINS BOTH NAILED
Jordan Smith in Austin, Texas and Deborah Orin in Washington; New York Post; Jun 1, 2001; pg. 005

JENNA COMES 'CLEAN': BEER-BUST BUSH KID FACES GARBAGE DUTY
Clemente Lisi; New York Post; May 17, 2001; pg. 003

DELAY IN JENNA'S BREW-HAHA
Post Wire Services; New York Post; May 3, 2001; pg. 026

W'S FATHERLY ADVICE: DON'T YOU DARE MISTREAT MY DAUGHTERS
Deborah Orin Bureau Chief; New York Post; Jan 19, 2001; pg. 008W.'S

Abstract: [Bush]'s warning came a day after The Post revealed that Comedy Central is doing a hasty retreat from plans to paint the Bush twins as "hot and sexy" and maybe lesbians in a new sitcom satirizing the first family.

Jill gave me this eye-opening reminder in a post she wrote about how the Bush administration’s loyal Justice Department has just agreed pay off the doctor whose career was ruined when the government scapegoated him to the tune of $4.2 million dollars.

Tax money. Hush money. It’s all the same to these people.

To read her post, go here.

The Grand Finale: The Iran War Has Begun

The Bush administration has learned their lesson when it comes to starting unnecessary wars. They botched the selling of the war in Iraq by drawing a bit too much attention to it. The Shock and Awe Air Show and Fireworks Display will not be repeated. This time, with a juicy presidential election to distract the public, the Bush administration is going old school. They’re going back to the tried and tested CIA covert ops war, baby.

It’s Charlie Wilson’s war all over again. Only this time on a different piece of sand-covered oil.

Seymour Hersh, the same incredible journalist that told us about the My Lai massacres in Vietnam, is now keeping tabs on the government, Iraq, and Iran. His latest report was just issued in the New Yorker and here are a few must-read snippets (although you should read the whole thing):

Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country’s religious leadership...

United States Special Operations Forces have been conducting cross-border operations from southern Iraq, with Presidential authorization, since last year...

But the scale and the scope of the operations in Iran, which involve the Central Intelligence Agency and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), have now been significantly expanded, according to the current and former officials...

Some members of the Democratic leadership—Congress has been under Democratic control since the 2006 elections—were willing, in secret, to go along with the Administration in expanding covert activities directed at Iran, while the Party’s presumptive candidate for President, Barack Obama, has said that he favors direct talks and diplomacy...

There is a growing realization among some legislators that the Bush Administration, in recent years, has conflated what is an intelligence operation and what is a military one in order to avoid fully informing Congress about what it is doing...

A member of the House Appropriations Committee acknowledged that, even with a Democratic victory in November, “it will take another year before we get the intelligence activities under control.” He went on, “We control the money and they can’t do anything without the money. Money is what it’s all about...

I guess the good news is that if the country is going broke, eventually the government won't have the money to keep doing this shit.

Snapping at the British

I just snapped at an English kid while talking about health care. He had a legitimate complaint.

He was telling me that there are a lot of people from other countries coming into England to get medicines and surgeries, and it is putting a strain on their health care system. These people are entering England because they can’t get operations and medicine in their own homes without wiping out all the money they have. The impact for the English is that when they need an operation, it takes longer because there are more people in line. He said that it sometimes takes 2 years to get a hip replacement.

That does suck for the English. They chip in for the health care system from their paychecks, and people who don’t chip in are taking their places in line for things like surgery – things so important that they literally alter the course of English lives.

However, as an American, this was tough to hear because all I could think was ‘Well, at least you get the hip replacement.’

In hindsight, my reaction was quite unfair. I basically said, ‘So what if you have a long line? Why are you complaining about having it so good?’ through my arguments.

But then I realized that he has every right to complain about that situation. Can you imagine having hip pain, and not being able to walk comfortably for two years? That would be awful. If my taxes were supposed to be providing me health care but outsiders were jumping ahead of me in line, I would be upset too.

My real problem was that we don’t even have that much medical security in the United States. We don’t really have much a health care system in the United States. It’s more of a health insurance system. If you don’t have good health insurance (and really? Who does other than people tied to corporations?), you don’t personally know a doctor, or you don’t know someone else with some kind of “in”, you wouldn’t get a hip replacement at all the United States without losing everything you own.

I can identify with these immigrants who are desperate because I fear I could be one someday.

It’s not that the English have it so good, because they don’t. It’s that we have it so bad.

That makes me feisty, apparently. I need to go apologize.

More on this eventually, I'm sure...