If and when indictments come down in the Plame case-thread2

[Moderator]

Link to thread 1:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

[shraby]

1. Since I started this thread,

I'll be the first to add. How did the power behind the throne let George get so far out of whack? He probably had an agenda to fill. Yet a lot of people have become wise to their modus operandi. Did he move too fast, too unwisely (for them), was their plan flawed? Any opinions?

[KoKo]

2. To be a devil's advocate, here. What did they give him that they needed?

We are in Iraq. It's a mess but what was it I read...14 Military bases being built and the largest Embassy in the world?

The "ends justified the means." Now they can cut him loose.

Just speculation if one wants to continue the darker site and what they might have achieved in spite of themselves.

[Disturbed]

3. What were the goals?

Have they been achieved?

I am hoping that the Plame case will derail the BushCo Machine but am not holding my breath.

The other thread is so long it takes a long time to load. Can we continue the discussion on this one, please?

[shraby]

5. They have

consolidated power in congress
come a long way toward consolidation of the media
started a mercenary army
put chinks in the constitution
gutted our country's security by sending the National Guard to Iraq
ramped up research and development of small nukes
gutted environmental programs
privatized and are privatizing education with the NCLB program

There's a start, and I'm sure there are more.

[never cry wolf]

8. Thank you shraby for starting this

and thanks to all the wonderful contributors, especially H2O Man. I have just spent nearly 4 hours reading through the original thread. I saw it when it was first started (like 5 posts)and didn't think much of it (not to offend anyone.) It is simply amazing the way it evolved into really, as one poster noted, a unified BFEE theory.

At numerous times in the thread I wanted to contribute only to read down a couple of posts to find someone else posting my thoughts. I truly believe that Bucky Fuller's theory of synergy (the sum of the parts being greater than the whole) is at work in this thread, as well as a bit of synchronicity.

As to your above post, shraby, you are correct. bunnypants has been very corporate friendly. Of course you can add the tax cuts for the elites, tax cuts and evasions for the corporations, an attempt to privatize medicare's prescription medicine....my god, the list is endless.

He followed their agenda, but they left the details up to him and his cohorts, which they promptly cheneyed up like all of shrubbies other ventures. By his ineptitude and arrogance, he has screwed up so badly he has shone a light upon their mischeif, and cockroaches prefer the dark. A loyal pawn, yes, but a clumsy and inneficient one. Just imagine if he and his minions had followed the DOD and DOS volumes prepared for a potential Iraq occupation and things had gone well, his approval numbers would still be in the 60's I bet.

Anyway, thanks again to all contributors to this amazing thread!!

[Eloriel]

135. * Raided the Treasury

* Lowered wages
* Lowered expectations for this generation and all following
* Fattened the pockets of most corporations and their execs
* Greased the legal wheels in favor of martial law and/or totalitarianism (should they want to do that), while retaining the illusion of democracy given the computerized voting machines that will give THEM the results they want while they give US the "privilege and right" of voting for whoever we please
* Eroded public education (goes with your point, but goes further than your point)

And I'm sure much more I'M not thinking of either.

[burrowowl]

7. You have a point

LBJ and Nixon were they puppets or being played?
Of course GWB can be cut loose now.
Who is Kerry and can he along with a renewed Congress and enough of the People waking up do something before it is too late?

[Lone_Wolf]

20. LBJ and Nixon were both puppets

A group of wealthy financial backers known as "The Wise Men" told LBJ that he was through and he not going to run for reelection. I believe this is a historical fact that people can do their own research on.

[burrowowl]

21. Will research

TR was 'progressive' because the Monied were afraid of the Populist movement and of course what was going in in Russia at the time. If the People don't wake up, we are sunk. And WWIII or IV depending is around the corner. It won't be like WWII.

[Lone_Wolf]

22. Very true...

The Elite only gives to Populist causes when it threatens to undermine the entire system.

[coeur_de_lion]

50. Thanks so much for starting this thread, shraby

[dweller]

4. thank you Mod!

this is important info, i for one appreciate the 2nd thread.

dp

[burrowowl]

6. Thank you for giving us part II

I would like to welcome:


kohodog (24 posts) Sun Jul-04-04 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #229
233. We need to think about the word "Republican"



This group may call themselves Republican, but at best they are facist. And do you really think Bush and Cheny are pulling the strings? Follow the money and I the only conclusion I come to Corporate greed and influence. And in a scary way, the individuals are secondary to the systems they created, not unlike Hal in "2001". Ultimatly Corporastions are created to make profit and while those at the top are making tons of money they are expendible because the only true measure of Corporation, by definition, is profitibility.
So we need to dump Bushco, restore civil liberties, and then get to work. A change qt the top is good, but only a start.

kohodog, the real Republicans have always been like this: they wanted to go on the side of Hitler in WWII; they wanted some Generals to overthrow FRD, etc.. Almost all of the legislation passed under FDR to protect the People has now been nullified or emasculated.

I strongly recommend Howard Zinn's: The People's History of the United States to give you a good base. Also Kevin Philips: Wealth and Democracy, thougth very dry at times, is a real eye-opener.

[kohodog]

102. They just seem so brazen now

And I don't remember it being like that. Maybe their hubris is catching up with them and they will be exposed to everyone, though I doubt everyone will see.

Even when the country was in it's formative stage there was concern about too much power in the hands of too few. And some thought that's how it should be.

But now it seems the power is in the hands of corporations whose only agenda (by definition) is to make profits. And they have no allegiance to any particular country and ultimately even their own leadership.

Burrowowl, thanks for the Zinn recommendation. I'll try to get to it soon...He's been on my list.

[calimary]

187. We DO need to rethink, and redefine, the word "republi-CON."

I posted this awhile back, but will happily revisit it for the benefit of those who are newer here.

There is a DUer known as Class Warrior, who from time to time posts a thread called a MEME MEMO - where we can come and post and discuss and kick around language concepts to REFRAME the debate, and REFRAME the agenda.

This all started, at least for the bad guys, with dear darling newt gangrene - OOPS, I mean gingrich - and his little GOPAC scheme. Along with his (unfortunately) effective organizing efforts and his obnoxious "backbench bomb-thrower" boasts, he also put out this little guidebook to all his minions about how to take over everything. Among his strategies: a vocabulary list - actually two - one of positive words and phrases to use whenever referring to republi-CONS and/or conservatives, and another of negative words and phrases to use whenever referring to Democrats and/or liberals.

His idea was to reframe the debate, in strategic manipulation of the language that would VERY subtly put a positive aroma on all things republi-CON, and a big, bad stench on anything Democrat.

For example: "Tax reform." It's a buzzphrase, or code, for tax cuts mainly for them and theirs. And nothing, ever, is mentioned about WHAT THOSE TAXES ACTUALLY GO TOWARD - THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT, especially to those in need, and things that just basically keep our country going. So, they have fostered a MOST ignorant and ill-informed disconnect, as well as a prejudice against all things TAX. WHEREAS, it should be pointed out that there is a LOT about living in America, and participating in all the wonderful freedoms and other things America offers, that costs money. Like getting your roads paved. Like funding research into conquering AIDS. Like making sure the air traffic controllers are on duty so planes don't fly into each other. Like patrolling our borders. Like funding our national defense. Like PAYING THE SALARIES of all those senators and congresspeople THEY THEMSELVES LIKE, AND their staffs and their drivers and their insurance and their perks and their postage and blah-blah-blah. Some of that tax money (dreadfully, I know) goes toward paying the salaries of their precious bush and cheney and the rest of the cabal. Even THEY would have to admit not all taxes are therefore evil. And even Grover Norquist would yell and scream and stomp his little feet if his garbage wasn't picked up regularly every week! But it's a lot easier to just furnish a lot of easy-to-plug-in words and buzz-phrases to oversimplify things. And it's an easy device for the lemmings out there to pick up and use.

They now issue wholesale talking points in the same way.

SO: I submit we need to do the same thing, but go it one better (because OURS is the truly correct side).

So let's start with the idea of "republi-CON." I submitted this concept as a way to refer to that group of opponents as "republi-CONS" as in CON-JOBS. "republi-CON JOBS" and "republi-CON GAMES" are good as a noun to describe what they do and what they're up to. "republi-CONMEN" and "republi-CONWOMEN" and "republi-CON-ARTISTS" are good descriptive wordings to describe EXACTLY what these people are.

Another way I've submitted for referring to the opponents is to call them the "IGMFU party." "IGMFU" (pronounced IGGum-foo) is an anagram for "I Got Mine, F-U." Because that, in my opinion, superbly and succinctly sums up what the republi-CONS are all about. Even better, there's a touch of humor to it. A point is ALWAYS most effectively delivered when there's a little humor wrapped around it. It's more memorable, pleases the listener because it gives them a chuckle, and leaves a favorable impression, the added benefit of which makes you look clever as hell.

Which brings me to possibly even a more lethal buzzphrase: "The Party of Cain." This is an exquisitely good one to use when fending off religious-right, fundamentalist whacko attack. They know the Bible, correct? (I try NEVER EVER EVER EVER to use the word "right" for ANY reason - it's been totally co-opted, tarnished, twisted, and bastardized.) Let's all remember one of the earliest stories in that beloved Bible of theirs (and many of ours, too, for that matter): that of Cain and Abel. We all know what happened and how it ended. And we all know how Cain responded when God came looking for the suspiciously missing Abel (him, really): "am I my brother's keeper?" My premise here is: if a Democrat were asked that, the answer would be some form of "yes, certainly! We all have to look out for one another, don't we?" If you ask a republi-CON that question, you know what the answer is: "HELL NO! FUCK (or in this day and age, CHENEY) my brother! I've got mine and I'm KEEPING IT! Let him go get his OWN!" Hence: "The Party of Cain."

Because they ARE.

REPETITION IS KEY, though.

This, or other strategic wording, should be used EACH AND EVERY TIME you refer to that party, or the people in it. Enough people doing that, and doing so often enough, will provide the same kind of effective repetition that the limbots and other rush-wannabes of the world push, incessantly, on their dittoheads. After awhile, it can't help but sink in. You may have heard the old adage about how repetition is everything. You repeat something often enough, and it becomes fact. Or truth. Or widely-acknowledged as fitting and proper and relevant. Whether it's good or not. Whether it's true or not. Whether it makes sense or not.

So we need to do that same thing. Eventually OUR memes will sink in and become accepted, systemically, as fact.

IT IS ABSOLUTELY URGENT/ESSENTIAL that we take back our country from these bastards. To do that, we have to take back the agenda. To do THAT, we have to take back the language, and reshape the way that agenda is perceived and understood. Proper, strategic use of language can help promote good vibes and positive reaction and a positive flavor to our viewpoints, ideals, and projects/programs, AND wrap the enemy, and everything they're about, in a nice, subtle stench of negativity. Once you start making all that rush-promotion and Pox "News" crap take on a negative aura, the point's been made, and delivered, right down into the bone marrow. It's unconscious, and subliminal. And it takes root, deep down. THAT'S how we get 'em.

I am so sorry this is long. But there's a lot to share. I know this stuff works. "IGMFU" was an idea my dad came up with, in his heyday as a very successful and clever sales/ad executive. This stuff works. All you have to do is try it, repeat it, and come up with your own versions to try and repeat. And repeat again. If you keep hammering it home, it will BECOME hammered home.

Thank you for suffering through this!

[never cry wolf]

198. Quite a long post, but admirable. here's a link to...

exactly what you are talking about. It really is a good article about how the RW has taken over the media talking points.

tp://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff....

[calimary]

212. Oh yeah! I saw this, and LOVED it. Thanks for posting it again.

This guy has it absolutely correct. He should be consulting the Kerry campaign.

[H2O Man]

9. Is everyone here?

That first thread was so much fun that we need to keep it going. I have to say that was a real pleasure for me .... and I have thoroughly enjoyed and valued DU before that thread .... but that took our discussions to a higher ground. Let's keep going!

I first want to respond to a comment by friend Stephanie regarding the Report from Iron Mountain .... Leonard Lewin wrote it as a novel, and it might be more accurate to call it a fable .... but it was based in very large part on a study commissioned by Defense Secretary Robert McNamara in August of 1963.

Lewin's fable attributes the information to "the Special Study Group in 1966" which was an organization so highly classified that there was no record of who belonged, what sectors of government or private business were involved, etc. So, while you are correct in that it was not a FACTUAL account -- it spoke to some truths. I did not mean to imply that it was other than that ..... I think it is of value as a fable.

Next, LoudSue: Yes .... there is an attack on the Constitution, and there is a coordinated effort to create a crisis .... I have referred to the "balance of power" .... and that balance implies the separation of those powers. Rather than using the European style of concentrated authority in a single institution, the Founding Fathers used a Native American concept .... the Iroquois had offset powers to avoid SPECIFICALLY one clan gaining an elite status .... which sounds a heck of a lot like the 51st Federalist Paper's noting that having three distinct branches with independent leaders in each provides for the "necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others."

Like the Iroquois Grand Council, our federal government has an built-in inertia that frustrates people who want to do things quickly. Yet this inertia, as Justice Brandeis noted, "(is) not to promote efficiency but to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power."

In his classic "The Imperial Presidency," Arthur Schlesinger notes that the executive office by its nature took an initiative in leadership, to move past that inertia. (In and of itself, a good idea; it creates greater tension between the executive and legislative & judicial branches .... and that's good.)

However, the presidents of both parties began using ill-defined war powers from "international crises" to move from a "presidential primacy, so indispensable to the political order" to a presidential supremacy. Schlesinger notes that by 1970, the US president had become "the most absolute monarch (with the possible exception of Mao Tse-tung of China) among the great powers of the world."

So you hit the nail on the head .... this group, the power elite, want a supreme president, with a unjust Supreme Court that will DENY the constitutional protections it should uphold, and a congress with less authority than a student council in a southern Baptist school. They are pushing an agenda. They are demanding a confrontation. Think of the personality of this fool george w. bush .... a rigid authoritarian who loves conflict. That's why they selected him for the position he now is in.

[Edmond Dantes]

10. You certainly have my undivided attention.

Many thanks for your wise insights. How fortunate we all are to have you among us. I had almost given up all hope of catching a glimpse of the big picture before it is too late.

Respectfully,
Ewan I. (smile)

[shraby]

11. Concerning the Supreme Court...

there are some of the members who are of the mind to retire, but have apparently put it off for this year since they usually retire at the end of their session and they didn't. Could it be they held off so they could see who is in the white house in November in order to avoid the court going totally conservative?

[H2O Man]

14. Good question.

Back in about December, a number of us discussed Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Some people said they had heard things that indicated she had second thoughts about the decision to put bush into office. A few believe her to be a sincere and decent person, and I think that they said she fit into the group you mention.

I don't believe that. I strongly recommend that people interested in the Supreme Court read Vince Bugliosi's "The Betrayal of America: How the Supreme Court Undermined the Constitution and Chose Our President." (The forewords by Molly Ivins and Gerry Spence are worth the price of the book alone -- two of the clearest thinkers in the country!)

Bugliosi details therole O'Connor played, from her reaction the night of the election, to her taking a leading role in what can only be described as a criminal act on the part of the court.

"I am not a lawyer, but I do know that when Bugliosi quotes a Yale law professor as saying the day of the Bush v Gore decision was 'like the day of the Kennedy assassination' for him and many of his colleagues, this is not an exaggeration." -Molly Ivins

"It is a pathetic spectacle that Bugliosi beckons us to behold -- this high, hallowed court and its revered majority sold out to Power."-Gerry Spence

[Edmond Dantes]

17. Regarding O'Connor.

It's my understanding that DOJ's Office of Legal Counsel, a bastion of neoconservative lawyers, stopped hiring her former law clerks because they are viewed as being insufficiently reliable in terms of maintaining unwavering commitment to the neocon agenda.

That's the scuttlebutt, anyway.

And which Yale Law prof said "Bush v Gore decision was 'like the day of the Kennedy assassination' for him and many of his colleagues."? Bruce Ackerman? The late Burke Marshall?

[H2O Man]

24. Quoting from Bugliosi, pgs 46-7:

(from his "The Betrayal of America")

"As the December 25 Time capsulized it, 'A sizable number of critics, from law professors to some of the Court's own members, have attacked the ruling as ...politically motivated.' A sampling from a few law professors: Vanderbilt professor Suzanna Sherry said, 'There is really very little way to reconcile this opinion other than they wanted Bush to win.' Yale's Mar lamented that 'for Supreme Court watchers this case will be like BC and AD. For many of my colleagues, this was like the day President Kennedy was assassinated. Many of us (had) thought that courts do not act in openly political fashion.' Harvard law professor Randall Kennedy called the decision 'outrageous.' "

[Edmond Dantes]

28. Thanks for quote. Yale's "Mar"? Is this Prof. Akhil Amar?

[Political_Junkie]

27. I've read excerpts of Bugliosi's book,

wasn't there something about O'Connor wanting to retire too, but she wanted to get a republican president in first?

[Stephanie]

35. Yes, that was the reported quote by her husband at a party

during the recount.

[Political_Junkie]

44. Thanks, Stephanie,

can't remember where I read that.
I gotta get my butt to bed, but I'll check back with this awesome thread in the morning! Night All.

[Stephanie]

84. For the record, just so we're clear, it was widely reported

http://www.gwbushwatch.com/reuters1.htm

Justice O'Connor Upset When Seemed Gore Won -Report
Story Filed: Sunday, December 17, 2000 2:12 PM EST

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was upset during an election-night party when she heard Florida was first called for Vice President Al Gore, exclaiming, ''this is terrible,'' according to a report in Newsweek magazine released on Sunday.

The report said O'Connor made the comment at about 8 p.m. on Nov. 7, and declared that meant the election was ``over'' because Gore had also won two other key states.

Quoting two eyewitnesses to her comments, Newsweek said that O'Connor then walked off to get a plate of food, and her husband, John, explained to friends and acquaintances that she was upset because they wanted to retire to Arizona and a Gore presidency meant they would have to wait another four years because she did not want a Democrat to name her successor.

Not long after Florida was called for Gore, news organizations retracted the call and said Florida was too close to be awarded to either candidate. The state was then called for Bush, but again that call was retracted and the race remained in limbo for five weeks.

O'Connor, 70, had been Republican majority leader of the Arizona State Senate before being appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Ronald Reagan in 1981. <more>

[ClassWarrior]

86. But why, then, hasn't she stepped down yet?

I heard too that she was waiting to retire till a repli-CON took office. If she wants to be replaced by another fascist, then why hasn't she retired yet?

Thanks, by the way, for all the great info.

[Political_Junkie]

99. Maybe because this republican

president has been having such a hard time with his nominees that she is afraid that her successor will still not be what she had in mind. The democrats are keeping a tight rein on Bush's appointments that he has to make deals with them to get anyone appointed, chances are she can see that he'll never get anyone in there that matches her ideology.

[RainDog]

122. The comment has been made public via Bugliosi

If O'Conner were to resign now, she would have to answer all the charges that she (and by extension, her fellow right wing judges) were not impartial, were not putting political decisions before rule of law in this nation, and all that.

Of course, in light of Scalia's big fuck you to America about his possible conflict of interest in the Cheney ruling, you'd think none of them would give a shit about appearances or actualities... obviously Scalia doesn't.

but O'Conner may have more concern for her reputation and the reputation of the Court.

[never cry wolf]

123. I also think she may have a shred of morals left

I think the entire SCOTUS is well aware of what is going on and realizes that although bunnypants has an R after his name, that the admin is really made up of radicals and they don't like what he has been doing. I think you can see it in the way their ruling have been progressively going against the admin, the sodomy law, affirmative action, the gitmo ruling recently.

I bet if they knew in 2000 what they know now Gore would have won 6-3 or 7-2. There are lots of pissed off old time repubs.

[alfredo]

12. How much influence does the

philosophy of Leo Strauss have over this administration?

[shraby]

16. I googled Abram Shulsky

who is director of the office of special plans. Here is the link, and there is a link on the page to a Seymour Hersh article. Abram was apparently a student of Leo Strauss thinking.
<http://www.etherzone.com/2003/cron051503.shtml >

[alfredo]

74. Intresting article.

Thanks for turning me onto it.

[Zan_of_Texas]

140. Re: Shulsky

Yes, that article does shed some light on Shulsky and Leo Strauss. But, the author seems to be into that whole crock about how the US was founded to be a Christian nation: "America, once blessed with faith in the One True God and founded under His dominion." Jefferson especially had no interest in founding a Christian nation. I have no interest in living in a nation run by Dominionists -- they are pretty scary.

Anyway, I don't want to sideline the great discussion. As for the Straussians, that is an interesting way to figure out some of the underlying foundations of their manuevering -- they suspend the rules we play by. Elitism, secrecy, power are the bywords, not democracy.

Chalabi, by the way, was a 1969 Ph.D. from U. of Chicago, the Straussian hotbed. Here's one article

Neo-Cons, Fundies, Feddies, and Con-Artists

By Francis A. Boyle

September 18, 2003:
Information Clearinghouse
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6050.ht...

[alfredo]

151. Thanks for the link. What I found interesting was seeing the

Christian take on the Straussians. It did fill me in a bit on Shulsky.

[iconoclastic cat]

13. Thanks and a question

H2Oman:
First, I want to thank you for sticking with this discussion; you have enlightened me on many interesting issues.

Now, I must apologize for asking you to explain something that you and others have discussed in the first posting, but I am still confused. My confusion derives from what appears to be a contradiction. You say that the following issues are true: Fitzgerald will not be able to indict Bush or Cheney; criminal charges cannot be brought until Bush and Cheney are out of office (a big "if"!); and the media will not adequately cover the grand jury's determination. If these factors are in fact reality, what could possibly happen on the 14th that would require me to buy champagne?

Thanks!

This is bending my mind more than any graduate course, by the way.

[burrowowl]

15. They can't indict

Bu$h/Cheney because they haven't been impeached or could they indict them and this could be grounds for impeachment, Wish John Dean would post here.

[Pallas180]

33. Rehnquist took care of that when he ruled a sitting President could

be sued civilly (not as a civil person, but as a civil lawsuit :>

If a sitting president could be sued civilly, then, to me it follows
that criminal charges could be brought against the same officials.

Which brings up another question. If they, the WH officials, veep,
assistants to veeps and pResidents could not be charged criminally,
then why would they all be consulting CRIMINAL lawyers in the matter
of the Plame case? I think their thinking is that they can be charged as was the attempt on Clinton and subsequent rulings by Rehnquist and the Supremes affirming. Heh, heh. Backfiring on them.

This may be a matter that would come before the Supremes in the future. Can a sitting ass (forgive my humor) be criminally charged while sitting?

Something else makes me think the WH is going to fight this and bring it before the Supremes.

Olson has quit his government legal job. He couldn't represent dimson as part of the government in this matter. It would have to be as a private attorney. Olson was the one who fought before the Rehnquist court to have them rule on no more Florida counting, along with Baker III, thus giving the election to dimson.

Although we all know that the once revered and now villified and dishonored Supremes (and they know we know) favor the cabal, I suspect the crows are getting a little nervous about the people.

I am given this idea by the fact that they have more or less upheld the Geneva convention law and ruled against the cabal in the matter of holding prisoners without due process, without lawyers, etc.in their last and most recent ruling.

Perhaps that is one more message from the "powers that be" to dimson and company or maybe they are trying to save their own faces - and skin. IMHO it's the latter.

[H2O Man]

26. July 14th:

It's not going to be a case of a Fox News Alert saying bush & cheney have been accused of wrong-doing, and are considering an early retirement. But I think there is going to be significant releases of information about the grand jury's findings .... and because you will be here, on DU .... rather than on Fox, we will be able to examine the significance of that information.

It will be likely that we see the slimmy Elliot Abrams from Iran-Contra, and Lewis "Scooter" Libby indicted. (What adult allows people to call them "Scooter"???) This will lead to Rove .... a soft and weak punk who will turn on his friends to avoid jail time. And this brings us directly into dick cheney's office.

I suggest that people consider reviewing any one of a number of good books on Watergate, to have an appreciation for how this will progress. Obviously, it is not going to be exact.

I also urge the older folk on here to continue to post their memories of that era .... do you men & women remember feeling impatient, and wanting the process to speed towards its conclusion? Boy, I sure do. But it doesn't happen that way.

Thus, I think you might want something good to sip as a group of us celebrate the slow but sure progress being made.

I like what you said about the graduate class .... this does have that type of atmosphere, actually. Good call.

[Pallas180]

36. Dear H20 - I deeply reject being called "the older folk" however

no, there was not a sense of impatience at all.

It was a sense of amazement. It was knowing this was historic, day after day watching the case and facts being brought forth. It wasn't that it was shocking, but that it was mesmerizing. No one living had
ever seen anything like it.

And what Nixon did, was a pale fore-runner of what this cabal has done. Nixon moved slowly toward these same goals. He had the temerity to issue an edict to universities asking them not to admit
so many Jews(.03 of the world's population) studying medicine and law in order "to give others a chance".

Dimson moved very very quickly, immediately, to undo the progressive programs of the last 70 years and void the Constitution.

Both regimes adhere to the flavor of Zig Heil. I don't say that lightly. All of Europe recognizes it and I don't just mean the officials, but the populace of the European countries know fascism when they see it.

[H2O Man]

57. I mean "older folks" as a respectful description....

I find our very fake "youth oriented" culture curious ..... in the context of my up-bringing, people who were around 45-55 were held in very high esteem ..... and "elders," meaning over 70, were treasures. The reason being that they had a wealth of experience to draw upon.

But you ... well, hmmmm ... your message is timeless! (grin) How's that?

I enjoy what you are saying, both about Nixon, and about how the Europeans view bush & friends. It's odd that Nixon actually did more for Native Americans than any other American president. Yet in his personal life, he expressed some anti-Indian feelings. He seemed to support the idea of helping Indians remain separate .... which was not entirely bad .... I think that Nixon's views of Jewish people were similar to his views of Indians.... in that he viewed them as "others," and somehow not fully American.

Last week I had an interesting conversation on DU with a person about some of the things C.G. Jung noted about the rise of the monster in Germany ..... things Jung saw in the early 1900s that indicated that what he called "the blond beast" was stirring in its sleep.... and I think its fair to say that many people around the world see bush & friends as appealing to the same archetypal images.

[merh]

65. Waterman - do you see anything coming from the SECs

investigation of Haliburton and the investigation that has been on going into Haliburton while cheney was CEO? I've read that the French have been anxious to indict him for a several years now.

[H2O Man]

76. While I hope so,

I have to admit it's not an area that I am well-versed enough to say. I'm perhaps a little more familiar with Plame, CI/MI affairs, etc. There is, of course, a good amount of over-lap in these issues.

Cheney, Ken Lay, Haliburton, Enron .... criminals running criminal systems that produce criminal results. But the legal complexities in indicting and convicting these cases is incredibly difficult.

What I am more confident in saying though is that all of these issues becoming know to the American public has significantly lowered bush's "trust" level. You know a president never gets that trust back. At the end of his life, Nixon attempted to take the role of an elder statesman. He wrote some interesting books. People listened to his opinion with interest. But not with trust.

[shraby]

78. The investigation into

Haliburton by the French may grow some legs as France is a whole different country with not a little animosity toward Bush and co. In fact this animosity could be the basis for the interest in starting an investigation. It's obvious that Chirac has no love for our current administration and may be pushing it in the background.

[merh]

81. It would be interesting if France returned its indictments at the same

time or shortly after the Plame indictments. I truly believe the French investigation and cheney's culpability in the Haliburton bribe scandals in Nigeria are the real reason why the admin began it's anti-France campaign. They wanted to make the people hate France so that the French's investigation into Haliburton and cheney would be given little, if any credence.

I am not familiar with the SEC investigation, I had just read they it had begun a separate investigation into Haliburton.

Thanks again for your posts.

[Zan_of_Texas]

141. Well, the French and Russians

had contracts in Iraq before we went in, is my understanding.

They opposed US invasion of Iraq. They looked from here like peace loving nations, but I believe the contracts in place favored them at the time, and they feared that US toppling Saddam would put them out of favor.

Of course, the PEOPLE of Europe and the world opposed the invasion, and not because they had Q(*&#@$ contracts.

[Pallas180]

144. Iraq owed France & others several billion dollars - which dimson

wanted to obliterate - remember his asking G8 to forgive Iraq its
debts? - to which the answer was no.

If someone owed you several billion, and they changed presidents, would you think it was a reason to allow their treasury not to pay
its debt?

And oh yes, I forgot to mention, and if that someone OWNED OIL WELLS,
would you say, aw forget it, you don't have to pay me. Go ahead and
give your new occupier all the money you owe me through your oil wells?

Well would you?

Nah, I didn't think so. Not in a pigs' eye.

[merh]

178. And maybe it is that the French doubted the integrity of the admin

because of cheney and his Haliburton bribes in Nigeria. In addition, the French may have been aware of the questionable relationship that the bush family has with the saudis and they doubted the sincerity of the U.S. in its efforts to free Iraq.

[Swamp Rat]

179. We could explore this concept of "otherness" perhaps in a different thread

- This is a prescient topic since it is an operator currently in use by Bush&Co. The most obvious manifestation drips from the salivating tongues of fascist propagandists like O'Reilly, Hannity, Savage, and Limbaugh, when they are dehumanizing "others."

Not only has treason been committed by Bush&Co in Plamegate, but all those who aided and abetted in their numerous, nefarious crimes. This includes members of the media. They shall be tried in the court of public opinion and some of them perhaps worse.

[H2O Man]

214. This is a fine thread to discuss this issue on.....

because it is, as you have noted, part and parcel of the divisive tactics of this administration.

Many years ago, when I was young, when I had to fill out various paperwork, it would have catagories such as "race" (which is ridiculous): __ white __black ___Indian ___hispanic __Asian __other

I always thought I was "other." After spending many years trying to get my fellow dyslexics to untie, I thought about organizing "others." I think there are a lot of "others" on DU.

On a more serious note, you are correct: this administration has learned from the best in history how to de-humanize anyone different than themselves. This includes the "non-voter" status of black people in Florida who tend to vote for democrat. It includes Islamic people who may or may not be of "middle-eastern" heritage. It includes millions of children who live in middle class and poor homes. There are many, many more.

The ugly tone they take should be alarming for every American. A culture that is paranoid that an ill-defined "others" will attack them; that are willing to commit to "pre-emptive" wars to curb the "potential aggression" of "others;" who are being exposed to the most violent images and hateful speech attacking "others" .... these qualities lead in a direction --EVERY TIME THEY OCCURE IN THIS MANNER-- that we should never venture.

[Swamp Rat]

218. We should be outright scared that propagandists are calling for genocide.

O'Reilly and Hannity in their zeal remind me of Rudolph Hess and other historical figures.

Since I have been studying colonization as it relates to historical literature/evidence describing "cannibalism" as a savage practice, I have become even more intrigued by the intellectual constructs used to control groups of people. Queen Isabella codified a system that practiced genocide in order to plunder the resources of the New World. She and the masterminds behind the "Cannibal Law of 1503" played on the "otherness" of the Americans and their culture in order to foment antipathy against them.

So, perhaps we can draw similar distinctions if we compare methodologies of the Bush administration with others that have a similar M.O. Isabella had a Gutenberg-like press and Bush has a coterie of Hess-like propagandists.

[shraby]

240. Whenever I find anything like that

on an application or form, I put in the space other "human"

[scarletwoman]

68. "Sense of amazement" -- Well put!

I was in my early 20's during the Watergate hearings, living in the then-hippie paradise of the West Bank in Minneapolis. A whole group of us would meet up at a local tavern to watch the hearings, it was a real social occasion.

While we were of course all heartily rooting for Nixon's downfall, what I remember most clearly is our sense of fascination with watching this historic event unfold. I certainly don't remember impatience; the feeling of excitement lay as much in bearing witness to the process as in any anticipation of the hoped for result.

Looking back on it, it seems to me that it was much like how one gets into reading an interesting novel. Your curiosity is aroused, of course -- wondering how the story line will come out in the end -- but that doesn't mean you want to immediately flip to the back pages to find out. You willingly commit yourself to allowing the story to unfold page by page, because the journey itself is so engaging.

sw

Oh, and I just have to add -- I don't mind in the least being referred to as an "older folk". I am delighted to have been around for as long as I have.

[Pallas180]

143. Scarletwoman, Exactly. What was the name of the Senator - Sam ?

he was the star of the show.....played the old boy southern country bumpkin lawyer act and suckered them all with his friendly demeanor, lack of rancor,southern sayings: "my pappy used to say...".

If he hadn't run it like he did, perhaps there would have been
partisanship.

In retrospect, they did one terriffic job.

On the other hand, my father was a died in the wool republican and even in the 1980's if you said one word against Nixon, he wouldn't speak to you for weeks.

My household also contains a far right winger, and we can't even watch television news in the same room. I yell at the television spouting propaganda, he watches Fox and believes every word.

[never cry wolf]

145. Sen. Sam Ervin

I believe that is who you are thinking of.

http://home.att.net/~howington/sam.html

[Pallas180]

148. Absolutely right Steviet, Sam Ervin. And did you know that

was where Hillary Rodham, then Clinton, got her start?

She was an assistant, intern on the impeachment. Still in college
I believe or just graduated.

The Cuban crisis, when JFK went on television to tell us we were
facing annihilation, and his assassination

The Nixon impeachment

and the Berlin wall coming down strike me as the most memorable and
important events of the 20th century or at least of my memory.

Then again - we are in the middle of "we shall see what we shall see"
now.

[Occulus]

137. Why do you think I keep referring to the 'Right'

as the Reich?

Everything I've read about Hitler's rise to power reminds me of the current attitudes of the Right- and I don't say that lightly either.

[burrowowl]

42. As an older folk

I was pretty amazed Nixon got re-elected but I remember going to the student union between classes and doing homework and my TA lesson plans at the student union during the impeachment hearings. Remeber going to live in France for 20 years in 1974 thinking America was on the right track. That thought didn't last long. Was totally amazed Ray-gun got elected twice, as were almost all my French friends. Didn't realize how very bad it was brainwashing-wise until I saw the recent Raygun lovefest on the media.

[never cry wolf]

43. In autumn of 1972....

I was a freshman at Northern Illinois University. I was fairly apolitical at the time, though against the war. Poly Sci was a required course and taught by TAs showing videos from the main Prof., Martin Diamond. During one of the required face to face small group meetings with the Prof. himself, Watergate came up, at that time it was still small news. He said that in his opinion it was going to bring down Nixon. We were all flabbergasted!!!

Upon further research, it appears Dr. Diamond was an original Straussian, ewwwwwwww. Glad I was just a frosh and all I took out of it were his Watergate comments.

Martin Diamond (1919-1977) - One of the troika of famous first-generation Straussians (with Jaffa and Eidelberg) to focus on the American founding; author of Electoral College and the American Idea of Democracy, Founding of the Democratic Republic, and, with Walter Berns and Norman Ornstein, After the People Vote: A Guide to the Electoral College. From this obituary: "Martin Diamond opened the door to the American founding. Through those doors have entered students and colleagues of Martin Diamond, yet unnumbered. They have recalled and are recalling past political arts as a guide to present political understanding. Through those doors they have carried the dried and decaying bones of political judgment, to bear flesh anew, nourished by the marrow of unblinking patriotism though moved by the sinews of inquiry." (books)

Interesting site I found here, Straussian.net: http://www2.bc.edu/~wilsonop/teachers.html

http://peopleslobby.tripod.com/georgewill72877voguishda...

[LizW]

71. Impatient about Watergate?

No, I don't remember being impatient. I remember trying to understand it all and being amazed that it was happening.

It was agonizingly slow. The Watergate burglars were indicted in September of '72. The enormity of the CREEP wrongdoing began to be revealed in October. http://tinyurl.com/ytekh

Then there was the election, and it was February of '73 before the Senate Watergate Committee was established. After the establishment of the Committee, it was over a year before there were indictments for the cover-up over 21 months after the break-in.

And even once there were indictments of people inside the White House, Nixon didn't go quietly. It took everything going against him, the Supreme Court, public opinion, Congress, and eventually, the Republicans themselves, to get him to go.

I remember my parents being very anxious. It was a real crisis, and no one knew what was going to happen.

[The Stranger]

126. I hate to rain on the parade here, but the difference between Watergate

and the current catastrophe is the media. During Watergate, we had some semblence of journalism practiced by the media. Those days are gone now. I am afraid that anything can be buried.

[H2O Man]

132. You are correct that the media

is very different than it was 30 years ago. However, there are far more outlets available today.

The Plame issue was not reported in any meaningful way by the major media sources. But that lack of reporting played no meaningful role in having a federal grand jury investigate it. None at all.

We've had people make wonderful jokes on part one of this thread about Fox News interrupting reports on the Plame investigations to update the nation on Michael Jackson's sex life. And despite an on-going efforts to bury this story, it hasn't gone away in the most important forum : the court system.

[wtmusic]

154. Far more media outlets and less scrutiny

The number is irrelevant

[H2O Man]

213. Not at all .....

The number is very relevant. There are enough sources available that there is no good excuse for being ignorant in this day and age. For people to complain, for example, about the content of Fox News over and over is foolishness. There are so many options available that all serious schools of thought can find representation in the media, and anyone who has an ounce of ambition can find the truth.

While complaining and finding a negative aspect to virtually everything is an art of sorts, it becomes a drag that holds back the artist's ability to engage in meaningful actions. Like what action, you may ask? Well, anyone who complains about the media has the option of creating their own newsletter, etc.

Being negative and not engaging in positive actions is the very definition of irrelevancy.

[burrowowl]

215. For those that have computers

the internet or the time to go to the library and use the computers there. But many working people with families (especially, the mothers) don't have the time and I think that the American workers non-leisure is almost on purpose. Keep their nose to the grindstone and they can't think.

[kohodog]

217. Greenspan tries to keep unemployment from getting to low

in order to keep wages depressed which has the effect of keeping people who are employrd willing to work harder for less. Everywhere I go one person is doing the work of two or three because of layoffs, and they rarely get raises. It is called "productivity." I call it the end of the middle class.

[H2O Man]

220. Valid points.

There are, as you point out, many people without the resources to access the true and important-to-them information. Let's call them "Group A."

There are also many people, including a few on DU, who complain that there are not enough medias resources reporting the true and important issues. These are "Group B."

Three things: first, I believe it is way beyond urgent that we begin to focus our energy on positive actions. Our goal has to be victory. So I want to throw away the negative attitudes, to free-up the good people who are held back by them. Let's do a simple exercise:

Second, part of that exercise is for Group B to get off their hindquarters, and help in conducting & producing the "media" that provides that true and important information to Group A. It can be done .... and MUST be done in order for us to win.

Three, we do have the ability to exercise our media skills on other levels. Late last week, on the original page #1 of this thread, I quoted a source regarding Valerie Plame being involved in an investigation of the marketing of WMD components, when the White House exposed her. I asked what investigation the WH needed to derail? Many, many people said that this information & question opened their eyes! Well, for every one of us who writes a letter-to-the-editor of our local newspaper, we can be sure it will open the eyes of still another group of people.

When we think about the negatives, we close doors of opportunity for ourselves. We need to be positive in order to win.

[The Stranger]

271. There is a very powerful force that keeps Group A from accessing the media

you describe. It is called denial. It is easier to remain in denial than to face what this Administration has done in nearly every political sphere. It is easier to remain in denial than to accept the fact that the U.S. waged war killing tens of thousands based on lies, has tortured and murdered people in violation of international law, has imprisoned its own citizenry indefinitely and without charges or access to counsel, even the fact that it has continued to dispossess all of those whom are not the power elite of any access to healthcare, education, and jobs.

[wtmusic]

219. Disagree 100%

Name one television news source that was questioning the wisdom of going to war in Iraq last year. One. *drums fingers on desk*

Probably 90% of viewers get their news from the same 5 channels. You are assuming that the general public has an ounce of ambition, and is willing to look elsewhere.

Re: creating my own newsletter, that's wonderful. Great for posting my Aunt Marge's brownie recipe, but very unlikely to influence the swing vote in Ohio.

You're assuming this is negative...not at all. It's more positive to be critical, and realistic--than to believe because we now have 200 cable channels and thousands of political websites that anything but the top five or ten has a major impact on politics.

[H2O Man]

222. That's fine.

Disagreement is a good thing sometimes. Just above your post, I put a message to another individual (I believe that your's is 219, and mine is 220). That person had noted that there were people without the resources to access the more informative media.

There are too many examples of high quality and effective newsletters around for your comment about Aunt Marge's brownie recipe to sound like anything but an excuse for not trying. Social change never comes on the wheels of inevitability, as King noted, but only by the dedicated work of those who believed in a positive vision of the future.

Again, there are many great newsletters. There are none built upon a foundation of negative attitudes, or self-defeating inaction.

[wtmusic]

226. Well, before you accuse me of inaction

I've probably averaged about 15 hours a week of community service over the past year and a half. I'm not patting myself on the back, because there are many, many people who do more than I do, and I could be doing much more.

Right now, IMO media conglomeration is a FAR more important issue than most people realize. Taking a strong stand on media ownership; becoming involved with orgs like FAIR, writing FCC chair Michael Powell, writing senators and congresspersons on that topic will potentially influence millions, and millions of votes not just in November but for years to come. Because so many people are lazy in getting their news the media ownership issue is the root of the tree. As independence and critical news sources disappear there is less and less hope for democracy. That's not pessimism--that's reality.

I'm not arguing against involvement, just that there are better ways to effect change than others.

[H2O Man]

230. First, I'm glad that you are volunteering!

Real glad. And I do mean that.

Gandhi used to say that what you think, you become. Thus, while I do agree with you that the state of the media is very bad indeed, we need to recognize that as separate -- though related -- to the otherpart of what you said ..... and that is that people are lazy in going after accurate news. And we have the ability to confront both of these problems.

Years ago, I used to do a fair amount of work during the summers on building houses. My talents, though perhaps few, were in building the basements. My father always told me that it was the hardest work, the dirtiest, too ....and that it was the least appreciated because you couldn't really see it as easily as you saw the rest of the house.But it's the most important part structually as far as constructing a strong building.

That's where we are today. None of us are going to be working on the top floors of this campaign. Our work is hard, it's dirty, and it doesn't get the appreciation it deserves. But it is the most important for building a strong campaign.

[wtmusic]

245. Good analogy

[KoKo]

173. But "Stranger" no one wanted to believe that Watergate was real, then or

that it was wrong...Had Repug friends who said..."what's the problem? so the Repugs broke into Dem Headquarters." It's just campaign "Dirty Tricks" and they ALL do it!"

You had to have a high sense of moral outrage to shout down your friends then...(always been a Dem in the Wilderness, but thanks to DU, I now have like-minded folks to hang with).

I think during that time the "people" were more open minded because the Boomers were a huge generation and just in their "Prime." Dan Rather was the only reporter (yes, he was a reporter then not an anchor, for DU newbies) was the ONLY Network person who really "got it" about what Nixon and the Repugs had done. The media except for "Woodstein" (Woodward/Bernstein) were still in denial.

So while PBS and the networks did have more "in-depth" news shows at that time...taking down a President over breaking into Democratic Campaign Headquarters was a bit of a "pooh-pooh."

We got more "international news" then and folks were much more questioning in the boomer generation, but our parents couldn't believe that Nixon was guilty of anything.

Just...adding what my experience was to yours Stranger. Maybe you hung with a more liberal crowd than I unfortunately was saddled with in those days.... 's

[Occulus]

229. I was discussing this and related topics

basically, a conversation form of the main points of this thread, tonight with a coworker. She's in her fifties, I think, and had quite the stories about what the media does and does not talk about.

People, this has been going on for half a century at least, and probably a LOT longer than that. Basically, I'm thinking it's been total and absolute complacency since the invention of television itself in the belief that what's being shown is true, but the denial of the idea that it (and thus, we) can easily be controlled as a populace by the people who put on the show.

I'm amazed at the width and breadth of this conversation, as well as this thread. I and others have called this the "DU master class," and I think that's very apt. When I left for work there were something like 150 posts; it's almost doubled in six hours. This could, perhaps, be the single most important thread I've ever seen since I've been here.

Keep up the good work, people, and keep fighting the good fight.

[NashVegas]

227. July 14? If So, Look for it to be Swiftly Overshadowed

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_05_...

Just to pass on some added information, about which we'll be saying more. There is chatter in Pakistani intelligence circles that the US has let the Pakistanis know that the optimal time for bagging 'high value' al Qaida suspects in the untamed Afghan-Pakistani border lands is the last ten days of July, 2004.
-- Josh Marshall

[Occulus]

231. I've been telling people

to watch the news carefully about this very thing. If I'm right, and we're all doing our jobs, the word is, albeit slowly, being spread.

My advice is: outline the pertinent facts about the Plame scandal to and for yourself (nice ring to it, no?... "the plane scandal?" two people have asked, to which I replied, "no, PLAME... P-L-A-M-E"... sticks in their heads) and then memorize the thing if you haven't by then. Make sure you have all the facts right, and start spreading the word on this if you're not already.

The more people who know, the more will make noise. F-9/11 is proving the media doesn't and hasn't told us all the truth. Let's wake some people up to that, if nothing else.

[Stephanie]

34. thanks for the reply H2O Man

I guess your reference to Report from Iron Mountain raised questions for me because it's been misused in a variety of ways. As a fable, yes, I can see how it could have value. But some have taken it as fact:

The Inspiration:

The inspiration for this incredible piece of satire was a short New York Times item about how the stock market had tumbled because of what the headline called a "Peace Scare. " The hoaxers' target, according to Lewin, was "the military-supported think tanks whose pseudoscientific assertions were taken quite seriously by people in the defense department and military industries.... Another objective of the book was to serve as a warning that a transition from a war economy to a peace economy would not be easy, a point that appears all the more pertinent today."

The Reception:

The 1967 edition of Report From Iron Mountain was the most talked about book of the year. A number of people, including some prominent intellectuals, believed the Report was authentic. Many others, including most book reviewers, labeled it satire. John Kenneth Galbraith's review of the book written under the pseudonym "Herschel McLandress" appeared in the Washington Post and Chicago Tribune. The book was variously described by reviewers as "a harmless subterfuge," "a hair-raising analysis," "the sinister work of a sick mind," and "a serious fraud." As a work of social and political commentary, it has been compared to Swift's "A Modest Proposal" and "Dr. Strangelove."

In 1972 after the book had been translated into 15 languages, Lewin publicly admitted the hoax, and by 1980 the book was out of print, the controversy all but forgotten by the mainstream press and public. Until...

Today:

In what may be one of the most bizarre twists of political satire, Lewin discovered that bootleg editions of his book were being distributed to members of the ultraright-wing militia movement who claimed it was an authentic government document and, therefore, in public domain. The back cover copy of the bootleg edition maintains Lewin's claim of authorship "was just another move in a deception game played with exceptional cunning and skill." Lewin sued for copyright infringement and the bootleg copies were turned over to Lewin. However, as a May, 1995, front-page article in the Wall Street Journal stated, extreme-right fringe groups continue to quote Report From Iron Mountain as "proof of a secret government plot to suppress personal liberties and usher in a New World Order dominated by the U.N."

http://www.simonsays.com/titles/068482390X/history.html

[TWiley]

280. Not to stray too far from the topic,

but hasn't the "ruling elite" philosophy (Plato's Republic Style)become the most visible difference between the two parties today?

The modern republicans believe in a very small ruling class governing a huge peasant class through the legislation of so called "moral" values.

The modern democrats tend to be supporting the idea that morality (whenever possible) is the providence of the individual, and that the best way to govern is through a huge middle class.

Just as discrimination between the races / classes was important to sell Plato's Republic, it is also becoming more visible today. Peasant Greeks did not realize their poverty because they had "a leg up" on all the other cultures, and could enslave any of them. Right wing radicalism in the form of racist (KKK et al), neoconfederate, religious groups, and militia groups have grown rapidly over the past 4 years.

Another difference is that Modern Democrats still tend to believe capitalism does need legislative controls to protect the interests of the environment and general citizenry against the greed of individuals. Democrats tend to see a difference between what is good for society, and what is good for capitalism.

Republicans, on the other hand, want to remove all economic controls. They try to sell the idea that freedom = capitalism, the economy = the stock market, democracy = capitalism, liberty = capitalism etc.

I realize that this is a bit off center from the original post, but it might be a good time to define and highlight the differences between these two groups. Sorry for the rant.

[Pallas180]

287. TWILEY No rant. Excellent valuable assessment. Thanks. n/t

[AlinPA]

18. This "case" is going nowhere. Its been covered over; media also

killed it.

[Disturbed]

19. Cynical

" A cynic is a former idealist who has discovered reality." Uh...something like that.

I still maintain that indictements will come down on two goons in the VP's office. The Pres. and VP won't be implicated directly but the stench will be there.

Maybe we put too much emphasis on the Mainstream Media. Meaning, if they don't report something that it isn't happening or "real". It's real obvious to me now that most of the Media has ben co-opted. Look who controls most of it.

Major Network Ownership Rundown:

CBS: Westinghouse Power
NBC: General Electric
FOX: Rupert "Satan" Murdoch
ABC: Walt Disney Corperation

[Stephanie]

37. Not at all

This case is in the hands of a serious career prosecutor out of Chicago via NYC - this case is not being pursued within the clubby Beltway backscratching system. Ashcroft lost control of it and now it will find it's own equilibrium. I have been staking my hopes on this case since August 2003, and I am still convinced that good will triumph. Hopefully next week.

This is DU's first big thread on the issue, AFAIK (thanks to DU poster partyline):

Guess what Joe Wilson told me today (the yellow cake guy)

[Pallas180]

48. Any lawyer out of Chicago is suspect. That is where most of

the lawyers, "young republicans" were spawned who worked on the
undermining of the Clinton administration, disinformation and dirty tricks, paid for by Scaiffe-Mellon among others.

There is and was a specific law firm in Chicago which was particularly instrumental whose name escapes me now, but I'll find it.

[Stephanie]

53. He's out of the Chicago DA's office, not a private firm,

by way of NY's DA's office (Morgenthau). I'm sure DU's attorney's and Chicagoans will give us their ratings shortly. So far I've heard only raves for the guy.

[never cry wolf]

55. Winston & Strawn perchance?

That is the firm of Jim Thompson, former repug gov and current 9/11 commission member.

By the way, Patrick Fitzgerald is NOT a Chicago Lawyer, nor, to the best of my knowledge has he been in private practice. He was an ass't. US Atty in NYC and worked mainly in terrorism (one of the lead prosecutors in the first WTC attack.)

He was recommended and approved for Chicago's US dist Atty head post just a couple of years ago. From all I have read about him, he is any perps worst nightmare, a bulldog who cares about the constitution and the truth and little else, no time for politics for this guy.

I hope my impression is correct.

On edit, here's his bio: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/patrickjfizgerald.html

and some more info, private firm for 3 years in NYC after graduation:
http://fitzgerald.senate.gov/usattorney/patfitzgerald.h...

[Pallas180]

63. Steph & Steviet. thanks for the links and info. I hope your faith

in this person is deserved.

However I'm skeptical because of this:

"He was initially appointed on an interim basis by Attorney General John Ashcroft, succeeding former U.S. Attorney Scott R. Lassar. Subsequently, he was nominated by President George W. Bush. The United States Senate confirmed his nomination by unanimous consent on October 23, 2001, and President Bush signed his commission on October 29, 2001.

Prior to his appointment, Mr. Fitzgerald served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York for 13 years"

1)Dimson and the "speaker in tongues" have packed and surround themselves with ultra right wing conservative lawyers who they later
attempt to pack onto the Federal and Appeals courts.This would lead me to think that Fitzgerald is one of the boyz, in addition to the fact

2) his service in the NY Southern District US Attorney's office was in the years under Rudolph Giuliani - no more has to be said there

3) the US Southern District prosecutors of the first WTC attack had in
their collected evidence files, all the information about further planned attacks and their method which they paid no attention to nor did they pass it on.

4) Since he was chief of the Chicago US Attorney's office exactly the same month as 9-11, why do we not know the names of the person's who speculated on the Chicago (options) stock market specifically on the price of United and American Airlines on 9-11 ????

On the other hand, it is said that a prosecutor can get a grand jury
to indict a ham sandwich, so I hope you're right - but if there are no indictments, I guess we'll know on which side this man's bread is buttered .

PS - Steviet, On Edit, no that is not the name of the law firm - but I'll try to find it and post.

[H2O Man]

69. A couple thoughts on Fitzgerald:

First, his experience under R Giuliani may be considered a plus. While I am not impressed with Rudolph Giuliani as a politician, he was a hard-nosed prosecutor in the NY Southern District Court. In fact, he may be the model of what we need.

Listen: he has the goods in this case. This isn't indicting a ham sandwich. It's indicting some swine who believe that they are above all laws. They acted with an arrogance