Watch Dubya and his weasels try to worm their way out of the Gitmo Supreme court decision.
Will America allow the world's beacon of human liberties and dignity the US used to stand for- to be permanently extinguished from her shores?
Surely, if Dubya ignores the ruling of the court, there will be no doubt left in the minds of those who can think that Bush believes himself to be the supreme ruler of at least the United States.
His claim of power which supersedes the Constitution and Bill of Rights is without regard to precedent or statute. His claim to such authority will be complete. Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald may end up indicting the "unindictable" should court rulings be rendered meaningless in Bushworld...No the law will prevail-see the juicy stuff below.
Dearest Readers, look at this. Prissy would put a bet down that this is what Fitz did with Rover...Find law To Proffer Or Not To Proffer? White Collar Crime
Unlike an immunity agreement or a plea bargain agreement, a proffer agreement will not protect you from the government's later derivative, or indirect, use of your statements. In other words, the prosecution is free to use your statements to follow investigative leads and to advance the case. The proffer itself, which is given in a proffer session attended by you, your attorney, the prosecutor and the case agent, is almost always informally seen as a prelude to a written immunity or plea bargain agreement, provided that the government, in its sole discretion, finds your proffer truthful. (In fact, there is no reason for you ever to make a proffer absent this informal understanding.) But the informal understanding will not be contained in the written proffer agreement. The written proffer agreement will instead recite that the proffer is being given without any assurances whatsoever. Traditionally, written proffer agreements allowed the government to use your statements against you for impeachment purposes in a subsequent proceeding, but only if you took the stand and gave testimony materially inconsistent with your proffer. In recent years, government drafted proffer agreements also allow use of your entire proffer statement against you at trial, even in the government's case-in-chief, if any portion of your trial defense (including your attorney's opening statement or cross-examination questions) is in any way materially inconsistent with anything you said in your proffer session.
Remember the long session between Fitz and Rove's lawyer reported by Wayne Madsen and Jason Leopold? This would also cover the supposed agreement that Special prosecutor Fitzgerald "faxed" to Luskin's office.
Why would you ever want to proffer? Because, and only because: 1) you have exposure; 2) indictment is a foregone conclusion if you don't work out a plea deal or immunity agreement; 3) you want a plea deal or immunity agreement; and, 4) the prosecutor will not give you either without first hearing your proffer. Even in this scenario, as noted above, proffering is a high-risk venture.
Prissy thinks it all of the above-which is why proffer would work for Rover. Prosecutors love it, of course.
Explains too, why mums the word from Fitz. He has nothing to announce-but indeed he will when it is indictment time. Rove is not out of the clear and proffer won't be high risk for the prosecution.
And gee, it's a little too late for Rover's lawyers to take this sound advice:
Also be aware that your white-collar defense attorney's statements to the media may be used against you, as an admission by an authorized agent, if the federal prosecutor assigned to your case is very aggressive. This is rare, but it does happen.
See another superhero below:
Watch the Navy Lt. Commander JAG who kicked some legal butt...Telling Chris Matthews like it is-Crooks and Liars Lt. Commander Swift v. Unknowing Chris Matthews Matthews really shows what shilling is all about.
But it still wasn't enough to suffocate the truth- a must watch and pass along to any Bushies. These are facts they cannot ignore if they want America to be a democracy.
Legal and presidential scholars saw the decision as a check on the president's assertion of expanded wartime powers.
They likened it to the court's 1952 rejection of President Truman's efforts to take over a strike-closed steel mill by claiming its steel production was necessary to the U.S. war effort in Korea. Similarly, the Supreme Court rejected President Richard Nixon's claim in the early 1970s of broad wartime power to authorize warrantless wiretap surveillance of domestic groups opposed to the Vietnam war, such as the Black Panthers.
"The Supreme Court normally does not reverse the president during wartime," said Stephen J. Wayne, a Georgetown University professor and presidential expert. "But this president has claimed a lot of power, much of it under the guise of the state of war that we are in against terrorists. And I think what the Supreme Court is saying is that you've gone too far."
The president and Vice President Dick Cheney have aggressively defended anti-war programs that have been criticized by Democrats, human rights groups and many legal scholars.
Editor and Publisher, more shame from the president who thinks violence solves problems although diplomacy was never on the menu. AP Embed Gets Scoop on Latest Alleged U.S. Atrocity in Iraq
Lenz reported this morning that five U.S. Army soldiers are being investigated for allegedly raping a young woman, then killing her -- and three members of her family in Iraq. He learned this from a U.S. military official.
And...The killings appeared to have been a "crime of opportunity," the official said. The soldiers had not been attacked by insurgents but had noticed the woman on previous patrols.
June 30 (Bloomberg) -- Bird flu tends to kill younger people, mirroring the pattern of the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, and the risk of the virus causing a worldwide outbreak in humans remains high, a World Health Organization study said.
The median age of confirmed cases of the H5N1 avian flu strain was 20 years, the WHO said in a report published today in the Weekly Epidemiological Record. The death rate among patients aged 10 to 19 years was 73 percent, the highest of any age group, it said. Overall, the fatality rate was 56 percent.
``The differences in the age-related case-fatality distribution among H5N1 cases are reminiscent of those observed during previous influenza pandemics, particularly in 1918, where case-fatality rates were higher among young adults,'' the study said.
Remember this? Scientists study revived 1918 flu virus
While lauding the researchers' goals, critics question the wisdom of reviving the virus. They fear it could be accidentally or deliberately let loose into the population.
"That can come about if a disgruntled or disturbed laboratory worker releases it," said Richard Ebright, a chemistry professor at Rutgers University.
"That can come about if a person of ill intent follows the procedures in the published work and reconstructs and releases it. It's worth bearing in mind that this virus killed 1 percent of the earth's population."
The scientists insist they have imposed tight security measures and say the potential to save lives makes the risk worthwhile.
Not to worry, look what the CDC is talking about-newly released June 28, 2006Prevention and Control of Influenza
This report updates the 2005 recommendations by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of influenza vaccine and antiviral agents (CDC. Prevention and control of influenza: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2005;54[No. RR-8]:1--44). The 2006 recommendations include new and updated information. Principal changes include 1) recommending vaccination of children aged 24--59 months and their household contacts and out-of-home caregivers against influenza; 2) highlighting the importance of administering 2 doses of influenza vaccine for children aged 6 months--<9 years who were previously unvaccinated; 3) advising health-care providers, those planning organized campaigns, and state and local public health agencies to a) develop plans for expanding outreach and infrastructure to vaccinate more persons than the previous year and b) develop contingency plans for the timing and prioritization of administering influenza vaccine, if the supply of vaccine is delayed and/or reduced; 4) reminding providers that they should routinely offer influenza vaccine to patients throughout the influenza season; 5) recommending that neither amantadine nor rimantadine be used for the treatment or chemoprophylaxis of influenza A in the United States until evidence of susceptibility to these antiviral medications has been re-established among circulating influenza A viruses; and 6) using the 2006--07 trivalent influenza vaccine virus strains: A/New Caledonia/20/1999 (H1N1)-like, A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2)-like, and B/Malaysia/2506/2004-like antigens. For the A/Wisconsin/67/2005 (H3N2)-like antigen, manufacturers may use the antigenically equivalent A/Hiroshima/52/2005 virus; for the B/Malaysia/2506/2004-like antigen, manufacturers may use the antigenically equivalent B/Ohio/1/2005 virus. A link to this report and other information can be accessed at
"When avian virus evolved to form the 1918 [Spanish] flu strain that caused the global pandemic, it didn't happen overnight," said CDC chief Julie Gerberding.
To prevent the disease from spreading from bird to man, officials in several Southeast Asian countries have slaughtered and incinerated millions of chickens, domesticated ducks and other flu-infected fowl.
"In the event of an avian flu outbreak they would be shut down immediately." Meanwhile, the feds are gearing up to test the first doses of an experimental vaccine against the H5N1 strain and stockpiling antiviral drugs to be used in case of an emergency.
The Spanish flu got its name because Spain was devastated early on by the pandemic, which killed 20 million worldwide from 1918 to 1919.
Feeling better? Take precautions for your families, Dearest Readers. We cannot trust the Dubya to take care of anyone...
WOTs it Good 4 Blogspot with Lukery Bush is impeachable on the bare facts of the case
"It's true: Bush is impeachable on the bare facts of the case, without any recourse to party differences. Back on Planet Earth, he's invulnerable as long as his party continues to control both houses of the Congress. If these Democrats and their supporters are serious about bringing him to account, they'll need to learn how to win elections. To make that happen, they might start by impeaching a few of their own leaders not for high crimes and misdemeanors, just for incompetence."
Common Dreams Shameful Debate on Iraq Pullout by Trudy Rubin (Baltimore Sun)
The debate in the Senate last week over when to exit Iraq was disgraceful. Americans deserve an honest airing of the most important foreign policy issue facing the country. But this congressional circus had little to do with policy and everything to do with election-year politics.
Democrats looked hapless, and many Republicans were flat out dishonest. The Pinocchio prize for devious discourse went to Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania. I'm surprised his nose didn't grow a foot when he claimed a recent Army intelligence report proved Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The report, released under Republican pressure in the midst of the debate, says that since 2003, about 500 munitions have been recovered in Iraq that contain "degraded" mustard or sarin gas.
Mind you, these munitions were picked up in ones and twos and date to Iraq's war against Iran in the 1980s. Such weapons deteriorate over time. According to David Kay, the head of the U.S. team that hunted for WMD in 2003 and 2004, these gases by now would be "less toxic than most things that Americans have under their kitchen sink." Their "poor condition" was affirmed by intelligence officials in a media briefing.
Trudy may tell some truths, but she is not for a pull out. Trudy wants to think she's "one of the guys" and doesn't have the guts to stand in opposition of republicans.
Baltimore Sun Pickets support accused Marines
CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. // As hundreds of protesters picketed outside Camp Pendleton yesterday in support of seven Marines and a Navy corpsman charged with murder in the death of an Iraqi man, defense attorneys began preparing for a long legal battle.
Waving American flags and holding signs saying "God Bless Our Heroes" and "Liberate the Pendleton 8," demonstrators shouted and whistled as Marines entered and left the base. Many of the Marines honked their car horns, apparently in appreciation.
"I think they should all be freed - it's unjust what's happening to them," said Jani Tubis, 46, a real estate agent from San Diego. "They were just doing their job." Marie Grischuk, 72, of Oceanside, the widow of a Marine, said she joined the protest "because it's just not right that they're in the brig. They were protecting our country against terrorists."
Protecting this country, 6,000 miles away-from a five-month-old baby terrorist? What would be his method of terror? Spitting-up on them?
Prissy is really torn on this issue. If the Marines did this, they should pay the price. If guilty, the have disgraced the uniform and this country.
But the people who ordered them sent them to Iraq must also be held accountable.
WTOL, Toledo Investigator Looking at Noe's Donations to Gov. Taft
Prosecutors said Perz and three others received money from Noe and then contributed it to Bush's campaign in their own names, allowing Noe to skirt laws limiting individual contributions to $2,000. Perz and the others pleaded no contest Wednesday and fined the maximum $1,000 each.
Noe pleaded guilty last month to giving $45,000 directly or indirectly to two dozen friends and associates to donate at a 2003 Bush fundraiser at a Columbus hotel.
Noe is at the center of political that has been a major embarrassment for Ohio's Republican party and led to charges against 14 people, including Gov. Bob Taft who pleaded no contest last year to failing to report gifts.
The most despised governor in the United States-STILL refuses to resign. Elections coming up in November you know-apparently Taft wanted to go out on a "high note." HA.THIS is what a deserter looks like. See below for a soldier refusing to follow unlawful orders given by this deserter.
From John Zogby-the world's most honest poll taker! Lt. Watada's War Against the War
In a remarkable protest from inside the ranks of the military, First Lieut. Ehren Watada has become the Army's first commissioned officer to publicly refuse orders to fight in Iraq on grounds that the war is illegal. The 28-year-old announced his decision not to obey orders to deploy to Iraq in a video press conference June 7, saying, "My participation would make me party to war crimes."
An artillery officer stationed at Fort Lewis, Washington, Watada wore a business suit rather than his military uniform when making his statement. "It is my conclusion as an officer of the armed forces that the war in Iraq is not only morally wrong but a horrible breach of American law," he said. "Although I have tried to resign out of protest, I am forced to participate in a war that is manifestly illegal. As the order to take part in an illegal act is ultimately unlawful as well, I must as an officer of honor and integrity refuse that order."
A native of Hawaii who enlisted in the Army after graduating from college in 2003, Watada differs from other military personnel who have sought conscientious-objector status to avoid deployment to Iraq.
This is a sticky point, Prissy knows, for military personnel. But Lt.Watada is not a stupid man-we all know, on paper-the war and occupation of Iraq is illegal.
Now even Prissy gets antsy when others don't "follow orders."
However, refusing to follow illegal orders is another matter-and it isn't a stand for sissies. Lt. Watada is truly doing the right thing and Prissy believes he is doing it for all of our soldiers-not just himself. Prissy sent the Lt.'s supporters the case from the German courts which support the belief that the war in Iraq is illegal according to their constitution... (that's right, the one we helped write)
The Prissy Patriot supports officers willing to take a stand against illegal orders.
Global Research Is the Bush Administration Planning a Nuclear Holocaust?
The stated objective is to: "ensure the most efficient use of force and provide US leaders with a broader range of [nuclear and conventional] strike options to address immediate contingencies. Integration of conventional and nuclear forces is therefore crucial to the success of any comprehensive strategy. This integration will ensure optimal targeting, minimal collateral damage, and reduce the probability of escalation." (Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations p. JP 3-12-13)
The new nuclear doctrine turns concepts and realities upside down. It not only denies the devastating impacts of nuclear weapons, it states, in no uncertain terms, that nuclear weapons are "safe" and their use in the battlefield will ensure "minimal collateral damage and reduce the probability of escalation". The issue of radioactive fallout is barely acknowledged with regard to tactical nuclear weapons. These various guiding principles which describe nukes as "safe for civilians" constitute a consensus within the military, which is then fed into the military manuals, providing relevant "green light" criteria to geographical commanders in the war theater.
A former top Defense Department official has told WMR that he fears the Bush administration will pull off another "911" before the November election. The official stated that the next 911 will be used as a pretext for shipping U.S. citizens of Middle East descent to mass detention camps, establish martial law, impose strict censorship, and finally eliminate the power of the Congress and the Supreme Court over the president. "The next 911 will be much more like the Reichstag fire in terms of creating a dictatorship," said the official.
RAW Story Gitmo win likely cost Navy lawyer his career'Fearless' defense of detainee a stinging loss for Bush
Lt. Cmdr. Charles Swift -- the Navy lawyer who beat the president of the United States in a pivotal Supreme Court battle over trying alleged terrorists -- figures he'll probably have to find a new job.
Swift made the analogy to the court, saying President Bush had overstepped his authority when he bypassed Congress and set up illegal military tribunals to try Guantanamo detainees such as Swift's alleged al-Qaida client, Salim Ahmed Hamdan.
The justices agreed, ruling 5-3 Thursday in favor of dismantling the current tribunal system.
Watch Lt. Commader Swift take on neorepublican and Bush apologist Fox news
Prissy will return over the weekend...
Washington Post Prosecutors Seek Assets Of Two Enron Chiefs
Federal prosecutors asked a judge yesterday to order former Enron Corp. executives Jeffrey K. Skilling and Kenneth L. Lay to turn over $182.8 million, arguing that their homes and other assets were acquired by fraud.
A Houston jury last month convicted Skilling of 19 criminal charges including conspiracy and securities fraud and found Lay guilty of a half-dozen other counts. The government said both men had misled investors about Enron's financial health at the same time they sold stock at inflated prices before the energy company collapsed in bankruptcy. Lay and Skilling face extensive prison terms when they are sentenced this fall.
"If I were two-faced, would I be wearing this one?"-- Abraham Lincoln
It is not easy for men to rise whose qualities are thwarted by poverty.--Juvenal, Ancient Roman Satires
Who will guard the guards themselves? (quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)--Juvenal
Fortune can, for her pleasure, fools advance, And toss them on the wheels of Chance.--Juvenal