| The Center for Maximum Constitutional Democracy |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RESCUE AMERICAN DEMOCRACY AND UPHOLD CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. DEMAND THE IMPEACHMENT OF BUSH AND CHENEY. George W. Bush: First in Lies, Second in Votes in 2000, and Last in the Hearts of His Countrymen.
[Attorney work product prepared on the advice and direction of counsel]
This website is protected by the Constitution of the United States of America.
MEMORIAL DAY NOTE (May 26, 2008): George W. Bush again defiles the sacrifices of American soldiers as he engages in his annual theater pretending to honor their defense of the Liberty he snears at with his incessant unconstitutional behavior. The very stones of Arlington cry out against the false administration of Bush and Cheney.
REMINDER FROM THE 2000 ELECTION:
In an interview broadcast on January 11, 2001 Katherine Harris was asked by Diane Sawyer, "given the uncertainties, is it possible that Al Gore did win this election?" Katherine Harris replied, "You know, I can't speculate. I have no idea." [Sawyer (2001)] If Katherine Harris had no idea who won Florida, how could she certify any margin for anyone in Florida in 2000?
VOTERS TAKE NOTE :
There have been too many inexcusable, cold-hearted, unconstitutional, and reckless screw-ups by Bush and Cheney. For example:
False and unconstitutional entry into the White House by Bush and Cheney.
Hurricane Katrina Negligence.
Unconstitutional Surveillance of American Citizens.
The Abu Ghraib torture scandal.
Excessive, and economically unsound tax cuts for the wealthy.
False reasons for the Iraq War.
Pre-911 Negligence.
DEFEND AMERICA AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION : Impeach Bush and Cheney.
WOULD ANYONE HAVE VOTED FOR GEORGE W. BUSH IN 2000 IF THEY HAD KNOWN THAT:
1. Under Bush many poor people in New Orleans would be left unassisted for a prolonged period after Hurricane Katrina, and that dead people would be left to rot there for days on end.
2. Under Bush the U. S. military would engage in torture in Abu Ghraib, that would disgust America and the entire world, undermining America's reputation.
3. About 3 trillion dollars in additional debt would be racked up by Bush as he pushed for tax cuts that gave huge amounts of money to the top 1% income levels and only a relative pittance to everybody else. The repeated irresponsible and excessive Bush tax cuts to the rich would be at the expense of budgetary soundness, undermining the long-term integrity of the federal government, of national security, and of economic opportunity for poor and middle class Americans.
4. Bush would fail to meet with his Counter-terrorism advisor, Richard A. Clarke, for nearly the first eight months in office, and then the September 11th attacks would occur. [Clarke (2004)]
5. Bush would lie (for example, on April 11, 2001) about the warnings he did receive about looming terrorism dangers [Presidential Daily Brief of August 6, 2001.], [Washington Post. (April 13, 2004 Editorial)]
6. For the 2000 Election, the State of Florida had paid for an inaccurate felon exclusion list engineered to obstruct voting by innocent minority voters in Florida. [Palast (2003)]. The New York Times alleges that Carol A. DiBattiste, a former "deputy administrator " for Bush's Transportation Security Administration, currently works for ChoicePoint at about 6 times her federal salary.[Lipton (2006)] ChoicePoint is the company that reportedly generated the erroneous felon exclusion list used reportedly used by Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris to reduce Black voters in Florida in 2000.[Palast (2003)] [United States Commission on Civil Rights (2001)].
7. There would be a false certification of the 2000 Election results in Florida by Katherine Harris, and others, in the face of about 300-fold greater uncertainty, compared to the supposed margin.
8. Even though Bush would lose the national popular vote in 2000, he would slither through the Electoral College loophole, but only by using a false certification of the vote in Florida, and a biased U. S. Supreme Court decision that obstructed a full, proper, and timely counting of the Florida votes.
9. The name of a covert CIA Agent would be leaked from the Bush Administration, apparently as political retribution against one of its conscientious critics.
10. Intelligence would be distorted by the Bush Adminstration to send America into a war in Iraq which would become, after an easy initial success, a costly guerrilla warfare quagmire with at least 2000 American troops killed and 15,000 injured (as of about December 2005).
11. The man who falsely entered the White House (via the biased Bush v. Gore decision and the false certification of the 2000 Florida vote) would reportedly give an order to the National Security Agency to tap phones of some Americans without first obtaining warrants.
12. The Defense Department under Bush would reportedly engage in domestic spying on Americans involved in Peace groups.
Would ANYONE have voted for Bush in either 2000 OR 2004 if ALL Americans had been aware of the methods used in the effort to get him into the White House and aware of the results of having Bush in the White House?
WAKE UP TO THE PROBLEM WITH GEORGE W. BUSH:
Fellow Americans who love Liberty and cherish the Constitution,
Let us reason together on the subject of what a genuine patriotic response to George W. Bush should be. The most fundamental fact about Bush is that he entered the White House through a false certification of a 537 vote margin in the pivotal state of Florida in 2000 with about 180,000 ballots left incompletely evaluated. It was obviously impossible to genuinely claim such a margin in the face of over 300-fold greater uncertainty. The key figure in that certification, Katherine Harris, admitted her falsehood in an interview broadcast on January 11, 2001. When she was asked by Diane Sawyer this question, "given the uncertainties, is it possible that Al Gore did win this election?" Katherine Harris replied, "You know, I can't speculate. I have no idea." A little later Harris said "There's simply no way I could know" and "you know, I can't say." [Sawyer (2001)] Yet somehow Katherine Harris certified a specific 537 vote margin for Bush. This false certification led to Bush being in the White House. In law "evidence" which is improperly obtained is discarded as "fruit of a poisoned tree." What then can we say about election results falsely certified in the face of extreme unreliability? How could the U. S. Supreme Court consider giving "safe harbor" to pirated election results?
Despite the species problem, the average dog had more right to be President of the United States than George W. Bush in 2001 to 2004, because at least a dog doesn't claim the White House without objective proof of winning a Presidential Election. At least a dog doesn't use a partisan advantage on the Supreme Court to obstruct vote counts. A dog doesn't have a faulty felon exclusion list to reduce opposition votes. At least a dog doesn't believe that the Supreme Court has the power to convert a lie into the truth.
The apparent Bush win in 2004, regrettably, makes our beloved United States of America even more of a laughingstock to the world than in 2000. People around the globe wonder how the United States, the guiding light of Democracy, could vote for the party that absconded with the 2000 Election.
On November 2, 2004 George W. Bush benefitted greatly from his illicit incumbency. Bush cheated his way in the first time, and lied his way in the second. One of the key errors of the Kerry campaign was in not pounding daily on the seriousness of the voting rights transgressions of the 2000 Election. It was a mistake to treat Bush as a normal candidate at all. In reality Bush had no moral right to run again after stealing the 2000 Election. No one should have been left to regard Bush as anything other than an interloper to be discarded at the first election opportunity. Anything he gained in 2004 was dependent on the illegitimate platform he had for nearly four years. Once an interloper, always an interloper. There is simply no way to truthfully ignore the effect of that undeserved visibility, and the manipulative power during the crisis generated by 9/11. Bush's political manipulation of the tragedy is even more brazen given that Bush apparently did little to avoid 9/11, and later even lied about a key briefing he received before the attack. Still, Bush successfully pretended to be trustworthy on national security. In the stolen four years in the spotlight, Bush lied so regularly that he was able to hide the truth from many careless voters.
George W. Bush's 2004 campaign ads touted his supposed "strong leadership" ability. In reality, his "leadership" is irresponsible, ignorant, illicit, and illusory. As for "strong" leadership, it is only "strong" in the sense that an intense stench can be called a "strong" odor. Why do I say that? Because he has fouled up the federal budget and thus a key rudder and stabilizer of the economy, by insisting on giving away two trillion dollars or more we can't afford on the misplaced priority of mostly enriching Bush's rich contributors. He has sent us down the path of unnecessary indebtedness when we are already unprepared to handle the expense of the coming increase in Social Security outlays for retiring "Baby Boomers." Even the interest payments alone on the debt Bush is adding will represent a vast unnecessary waste of taxpayers' money, "the people's money," as Bush is fond of saying. Furthermore, what kind of leadership was it for Bush to go for a month-long vacation in Crawford when the Bush team had been told from the beginning of their administration that there was a serious threat of a terrorist attack in the United States. [Clark (2004)] Add to all this the fact that, as I will keep saying, Bush's presence in the White House was based on a false certification of a 537 vote margin for Bush in Florida in 2000 in the face of 300 fold greater uncertainty.
Should America apparently have given him more of an opportunity to damage our nation? I don't think so. Why would we want to reward George W. Bush for his poor "leadership" example? What kind of leadership is it when after only a few months of his time in the White House he ran away from the full-time responsibilities of the job for a month-long vacation? Do we reward "leaders" who shirk their duties in a crisis to go on vacation for a month, ignoring, downplaying, or misrepresenting imminent threats of terrorism on American soil? How nice it would have been if Bush had been focused instead on ensuring effective preventative actions and inter-agency information sharing regarding potential aircraft hijackings and other terrorist activity. When Bush is in Crawford he instead seems to be fond of golf and careening around his ranch in a pickup truck looking for brush to clear. He should start by trying to clear the cobwebs from his chemically impaired brain. George W. Bush is an intellectual basket case attached to a balloon filled with hot air. Just think, a vote for Bush was a vote for 4 more years of listening to him struggle with his native language, 4 words or so at a time, 4 phrases and 4 pauses per minute, for what? So he can further undermine our Democracy and Constitutional Rights? So he can vacation through more terrorist warnings? So he can undercut the economy even more? So he can use the White House to spread more lies?
Note that George W. Bush's January 20, 2004 so-called "State of the Union Address" was yet another prime example of attempted mass deception and seemingly effective self-deception. He began by saying "America this evening is a nation called to great responsibilities. And we are rising to meet them." The American people are more than equal to the present challenges with God's help, but Bush and his team are not, particularly as they attempt to manipulate a segment of the Church while mocking God with their incessant lies. Bush's insistence on making his grotesquely unbalanced tax policy "permanent" is further undermining the financial health of the whole country. Accordingly he is running away from his true responsibilities in the White House. Too bad he didn't develop a sense of shame and run all the way back to permanent residence in Crawford after the 2000 election fiasco. In the "State of the Union Address" Bush lauded the military personnel stationed around the globe for "bringing hope to the oppressed and delivering justice." Those 50 million Americans who voted in the majority in 2000 against Bush would like to have Bush bring them some hope and genuine justice in the face of the oppressive violation of American voting rights in Florida in 2000. A Bush-Cheney resignation would have been nice, though belated. In 2000 Rehnquist and his four fellow Banana Republicans on the U. S. Supreme Court gave Bush a counterfeit ticket to the Oval Office in the absence of proof of who received the most votes in the pivotal state of Florida. Bush could only have kept his oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution" by demanding that Cheney resign, and insisting on the confirmation of Gore as Cheney's replacement. Then Bush himself should have resigned to elevate Gore. After all the U. S. Commission on Civil Rights noted the Republican tampering with the election in Florida and recommended in its June 2001 report that Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris be prosecuted by the Justice Department for violations of the Voting Rights Act in the 2000 Election. [United States Commission on Civil Rights (2001)]
Bush claimed that the "American economy is growing stronger. The tax relief...is working." Well, it was too little, too late. Losing over two million jobs in three years was not good economic policy. Overall the Bush tax policies have weakened the economy and, despite temporary surges, the deficits from the exorbitant tax cuts generate severe downward pressure on the economy. Think of how much better the ecomomy could do without the burden of unnecessary debt and its interest costs.
The annual interest payment in Fiscal Year 2004, for example, was $160 billion, or 7 % of the $2.29 trillion 2004 federal budget. The interest payments alone are projected by Bush's own Office of Management and Budget to double from 2004 levels by Fiscal Year 2011, reaching an estimated $322 billion, or about 10 % of an estimated $3.24 trillion federal budget. [Executive Office of the "President" of the United States (2006)] Think of the undue influence the deepening debt gives to foreign creditors like Japan or Communist China, and the unnecessary economic vulnerablity it creates for the United States. Reagan's popularity, despite the irresponsibly escalated debt Reagan's policies generated in the 1980's, was criticized by Speaker Tip O'Neill. O'Neill is quoted as saying variations of: "If I were to write 200 billion in hot checks, I could show you a good time too."
Dick Cheney is quoted by former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill in Ron Suskind's book, The Price of Loyalty, as saying, "Reagan proved deficits don't matter." [Suskind (2004)] This is shockingly false and irresponsible for Cheney to say. It disregards the enormous drain on needed federal resources as interest payments alone mushroomed from about 9% of the federal budget (in 1980) to about 15% of the federal budget (in 1989) in the Reagan-Bush, Senior, years. Near the end of the Eighties that meant about an extra 100 billion dollars in interest costs in one year alone. The United States went three trillion dollars deeper in debt during the twelve years of the full Reagan and Bush, Senior, terms.
Cheney is quoted as making another telling remark regarding additional exorbitant tax cuts (beyond the absurd and irresponsible cuts already made). Cheney reportedly said, "We won the midterms. This is our due." [Suskind (2004)] In truth, the Republican's "due" is loss of every office they run for, especially the White House. Cheney and the Republicans are too clever by half, pillaging the economy until the people recoil from them in pain, leaving the Democrats to make the sacrifices to fix the mess the Republicans create, and then the Republicans stir up the voters against the strong medicine required by conscientious Democrats to solve the problems the Republicans created in the first place. I am talking, for example, about the difficult measures passed by the Democrats in the 1993 Omnibus Management and Budget Reconciliation Act to restore fiscal balance and spur the great growth of the 1990's. It cost the Democrats the House of Representatives in 1994.
George W. Bush is assuming that the American People are either stupid or not paying attention. He expects he can continue to get away with screwing up everything in order to benefit his rich contributors and associates. He is repeating an expanded cycle of debt and maniplulation.
Among the persons present at a celebration for the 2003 post-restoration redisplaying of the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence at the National Archives, were the two people least capable of honoring these cherished documents. It was a grotesque travesty to allow Rehnquist or Bush into the National Archives, much less to allow them to pretend to honor these charters. Perhaps Tom Ridge was tempted to search each, Bush and Rehnquist, for possession of cigarette lighters or portable paper shredders? At the Archives Bush stated. "By this rededication we show our deep respect for the first principles of our republic and our lasting gratitude to those first citizens of the United States of America." Bush should focus on more than just ceremonially honoring the principles of American Democracy.
Perhaps in Bush's facsimile of a brain there is the notion that by presiding during the restoration of the parchments themselves, the continued sheltering of them from the elements, and the presence of military guards at the ceremony, that this is how he will be remembered for discharging his oath of office with its pledge to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution." How will he account for himself with regard to the matter of swearing to "faithfully execute the office of President of the United States?" Note, for example, that, by attempting to strangle the functions of the federal government by irresponsible budget practices, Bush is undermining the very entity of which he is ostensibly the chief executive. This can hardly be called faithful execution of the office. George W. Bush has been manipulating the patriotism of the American people. Bush has been distorting the love Americans naturally feel for this country. He has been twisting it for his Party's political benefit.
By patriotic contrast, George Washington's troops struggled to survive the Winter in Valley Forge, leaving behind bloody footprints in the snow as they walked with rags on their feet instead of shoes. They did not suffer that hardship so George W. Bush could slither into the White House via a false certification of voting results in Florida and a biased Supreme Court decision. A symbolically fitting hypothetical reward for Bush for coming to the White House at the expense of Constitutionally protected voting rights, for fouling up our economy, for undermining the health of the federal budget, for being absent from full-time work for a month before 9/11, a fitting hypothetical reward would be perpetual confinement to Crawford as soon as legally possible. He should, in theory, be given a map of imaginary oil deposits under brush covered sections of his ranch that he must run around drilling for.
The Presidential Daily Brief that Bush received on August 6, 2001 notes the interest of Bin Laden in attacking New York and Washington. It further says that Bin Laden was interested in a hijacking to gain release of a leader of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Although the brief was publicly released on April 10, 2004 Bush has subsequently claimed on April 11, 2004 that the brief "said nothing about an attack on America," [Washington Post. (April 13, 2004 Editorial)] yet the text of the August 6, 2001 brief says "Bin Laden since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the United States," [Presidential Daily Brief of August 6, 2001] and that Bin Laden had "implied" that his associates "would follow the example of the World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and 'bring the fighting to America.'" [Presidential Daily Brief of August 6, 2001] It also said that "After missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, Bin Laden told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington." [Presidential Daily Brief of August 6, 2001] Even an attack in Los Angeles is mentioned. The text also states that there had been "suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings and other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York." [Presidential Daily Brief of August 6, 2001] The August 6, 2001 report also notes a warning in May 2001 "that a group of Bin Laden supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives." [Presidential Daily Brief of August 6, 2001] There are several possibilities here.
A) Bush had forgotten that New York, Washington and Los Angeles are in the United States.
B) Bush did not care about New York, Washington and Los Angeles.
C) Bush cannot connect dots.
D) Bush thinks he can lie even when widely published facts show the opposite of what he says.
None of these possibilities represents a desirable Presidential attribute.
Finally, it is vital to note that, overall, the Republican leadership treats the Constitution as though it were a work of fiction. They view it as something to be evaded. Defend the Constitution: NEVER vote Republican. Any candidate who is still a Republican after the false outcome of the 2000 Presidential election deserves the severe rebuke of the voters at the polls. As each election approaches, we should encourage everyone we know and meet to echo these words in their minds in the voting booth: The Republicans refused to count the votes in 2000: Refuse to vote Republican.
George W. Bush is the personification of a modern derailment of our cherished form of constitutional democracy. To borrow from Shakespeare, Bush is "an offense rank unto heaven," having entered the White House based on a false certification of results in Florida and a biased Supreme Court decision. In 2000 George W. Bush was first in scams, second in votes, and last in the hearts of his countrymen.
The Republican Party mistakenly acts from an apparent belief that governments derive their just powers from the deception of the governed. Don't let any voter be deceived again. Let the whole nation say: Remember the 2000 Election, NEVER vote Republican.
The Center For Maximum Constitutional Democracy
Original Versions: 10/17/2002, 3/25/2004
Revised: 5/8/2004
Minor Revision: 8/21/2004
Expanded: 9/23/2004
Expanded: 9/29/2004
Revised: 11/1/2004
Revised: 12/11/2004, 12/12/2004
Revised: 12/23/2004
Revised: 5/30/05
Latest Updates: 1/29/06, 2/19/06, 5/5/06, 7/4/06, 8/19/06, 11/1/06, 11/5/06, 1/18/07, 4/20/07, 5/7/07.
MORE PROBLEMS WITH BUSH
- SOME KEY 2004 ELECTION IRREGULARITES IN OHIO
The 2004 Presidential vote tallies are inherently rendered suspect due to widely reported irregularities. Just in Ohio, for example, Walden W. O'Dell, the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Diebold, a manufacturer of computerized voting machines, is reported to have stated in an August 14, 2003 campaign contribution solicitation letter that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year." [Krugman (2003)] Why was someone such as O'Dell, with such blatant political bias, allowed anywhere near a voting machine contract in Ohio or anywhere else? It has also been widely noted that the Ohio Secretary of State, Kenneth Blackwell, is also a Bush partisan.
The meeting of Ohio's electors was marred by the presence at the podium of the Ohio Republican Party Chairman, who naturally reminded the electors to vote for George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Another speaker at the podium chortled that the Ohio electors were creating an auditable paper trail (in mocking contrast to the alleged lack of auditable paper receipts from many, or all, voting machines in Ohio.) It also appeared that many of the Ohio electors who signed the six copies of the certificate of their collective vote did not read what they were signing before affixing their signatures.
For additional allegations regarding the integrity of the vote in 2004 refer to and evaluate:
Conyers, Rep. John. (Democratic Members of the House Judiciary Committee.) What Went Wrong in Ohio. The Conyers Report on the 2004 Presidential Election. (Anita Miller, ed.) (Chicago: Academy Chicago Publishers (2005).
Miller, Mark Crispin. Fooled Again. How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They'll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them). (New York: Basic Books (2005)).
IMPEACHMENT
Why shouldn't Bush and Cheney be impeached and convicted for the following?:
1. Negligence in Hurricane Katrina relief.
2. The Abu Ghraib torture scandal.
3. Pre-9/11 negligence. (Bush failed to meet with his Counter terrorism advisor, Richard A. Clarke, for about the first seven months of Bush's administration, according to Clarke.) (Refer to [Clarke (2004)].)
4. Bush's lies about terrorism warnings. (Refer to [Presidential Daily Brief of August 6, 2001 (2004)] and [Washington Post. April 13, 2004 Editorial (2004)].)
5. Warrantless domestic wiretaps on American citizens.
6. The Defense Department's spying on domestic peace groups.
7. Voting rights violations, such as the use by the Bush campaign of false voter exclusion lists in Florida in 2000. (Refer to [United States Commission on Civil Rights (2001)], and [Palast (2003)])
8. Use by the Bush campaign of false election certification in Florida in 2000. (Refer to [Sawyer (2001)])
9. Use by the Bush campaign of the Supreme Court for vote count obstruction in 2000.
10. White House leaking of the name of a CIA covert operative.
11. Bush's lies about the basis for going to war in Iraq.
12. The awarding, to Cheney's former company, of large contracts in Iraq without competitive bidding.
UNPRESIDENTIAL INAUGURATION
George W. Bush's second "Inaugural Address" was in reality a stunning self-indictment. Applying its priorities to the person mouthing the words would provide an excellent outline for his impeachment and conviction.
The returning Bush noted that "there is only one force of history that can... expose the pretensions of tyrants... that is the force of human freedom." He pointed out that "it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world." Does that mean that Bush will be disbanding the Republican Party and donating money to the Democratic Party?
Bush continued by saying that "freedom, by its nature must be chosen and defended by citizens and sustained by the rule of law and the protection of minorities." This should serve as an avenue of reminder that in 2000 the Bush campaign in Florida created a faulty felon voter exclusion list calculated to disproportionately impede African-Americans from voting in Florida in 2000. An estimated 10,000 to 90,000 African-Americans, overwhelmingly Democrats, were prevented from voting in Florida in 2000. Bush's falsely certified margin in Florida was 537 votes that year. The "rule of law" was not in evidence in the biased U. S. Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore. Did Bush forget at that point in the speech to insist that the House of Representatives convene on the spot to impeach Bush and Cheney for voting rights violations? Ironically Bush also postured that "we cannot carry the message of freedom and the baggage of [racial] bigotry at the same time." Bush also pretended in his speech to honor the "peaceful outrage under the banner, 'Freedom Now,'" in the 1960's Civil Rights Movement.
Bush bloviated that "America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling," yet the Republican leadership was quite content to impose Bush's irresponsibility and incompetence on America itself in 2000. Bush spewed that "America's influence is considerable and we will use it confidently in freedom's cause." The falsehood of the certification of Bush's 2000 Election margin in Florida and of the Bush v. Gore decision have greatly diminished America's influence as an example of democracy.
Bush would do well to heed his own mouthed syllables that "We will persistently clarify the choice before every ruler and every nation. The moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom, which is eternally right." The oppression in America, by the unelected Bush over the last four years, is only magnified by its perpetuation by electoral manipulation by tactics of fear, slander, and "black-box" voting without auditability. Bush cheated his way into the White House in 2000, and slithered his way in again in 2004.
Bush pretends to believe that "there is no justice without freedom and there can be no human rights without human liberty." Well, there is no liberty without genuine vote counts, and without free speech.
Bush claims that "All who live in tyranny... can know that the United states will not ignore your oppression or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you." So why did not Bush stop there and demand that he and Cheney and Rehnquist be impeached and convicted? Bush quoted Lincoln as saying, "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves, and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it." Did Bush then demand immediate incarceration for himself and his colleagues? Bush orated onward that an "untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world." Apparently not illumined by its light, however, are the dark recesses of either Bush's brain or his heart.
Let Bush apply to himself his emphasis that the "unjust encounter justice." Let him apply to America the idea that "the captives are set free." There remains great reason for outrage with Bush and Cheney still in office, because America is not free. Bush used his illicitly obtained four years in office as a platform to illegitimately manipulate his way into another term.
An Open Letter to the Washington Post from the Center for Maximum Constutional Democracy:
The Washington Post need not bother to celebrate any connection to "Deep Throat" of the Watergate era. The Post has since discarded its heritage to embrace the "Deep Threat" to the Constitution, George W. Bush. The Post donated $100,000 to the 2004 Bush campaign. The Post even had the utter gall to praise Bush on the same editorial page on which it commemorated its connection to "Deep Throat." The Post was willing to overlook Bush's motives and his poor performance to laud him for recently holding more news conferences. Wake up. In a democratic society, leaders who abscond with a Presidential election are unconstitutionally vial. The Post has become obscene.
The Center for Maximum Constitutional Democracy
June 1, 2005
The Center's Favorite Nicknames for George W. Bush:
"Shrub" (apparently originated by Molly Ivins)
"Pretzel-dent Bush"
"Scamlet"
"Spurious George"
"Minimus"
COMMENTS ON RECENT EVENTS:
INSIDE EVIDENCE OF THE POLITICAL MANIPULATION OF MANY CHRISTIANS BY BUSH :
Bush's former deputy director of "Faith-Based" programs, David Kuo, recently revealed in his new book, Tempting Faith, that the White House did not sincerely work on realizing the programs that were supposed to be the cornerstone of Bush's "compassionate Conservatism." When Kuo's superior, Don Willet, sought guidance from Karl Rove on what should be done in the initiative, Rove told him, "I'don't know. Just get me a f*%#ing faith-based thing. Got it." (Kuo (2006), pp. 140-141) Kuo also discloses that "evangelical leaders" were regarded as "the nuts." (Kuo (2006), p.229)
FEDERAL JUDGE RULES BUSH'S NSA SURVEILLANCE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
On August 17, 2006 United States District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor found the NSA surveillance of Americans is unconstitutional. The judge stated, "It was never the intent of the framers to give the president such unfettered control, particularly when his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights," the New York Times reports. The judge determined that the surveillance is contrary to both the First and Fourth Amendments, and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. [Liptak and Lichtblau (2006)] The initial court decision to shut down the surveillance is on hold, pending an appeal, but the glaring Constitutional violation by Bush is undeniable.
Shortly after the disclosure of the Bush administration's spying on Americans, Prof. Jonathan Turley of George Washington University Law School stated that Bush's domestic surveillance actions are impeachable offenses, in testimony in Rep. John Conyers's hearings on 1/20/06.
THE ARROGANT EXECUTIVE.
To those who would claim "unified executive theory" gives Bush extraordinary authority, a simple lesson: The Amendments to the Constitution (such as the BILL OF RIGHTS) supercede Article II. Another simple lesson: The Congress and the Supreme Court were specifically designed to counter-balance the power of the Presidency.
7/23/06 Note on Bush's 7/20/06 speech to the NAACP:
After his 2000 campaign reportedly prevented an estimated 10,000 to 90,000 African Americans in Florida from voting in 2000, how could George W. Bush even show his face to the NAACP? How could he even dare to mention Liberty to them? How could he claim any affinity for the Emancipation legacy of Abraham Lincoln? How dare Bush even mention Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.? Is anybody still fooled by Bush?
1/17/06 Note: Al Gore spoke out vigorously in defense of American Constitutional Government on 1/16/06. Read this Martin Luther King Day speech given at Constitution Hall (for example, at www.algore-08.com).
9/5/05 and 9/10/05 Notes on the Nomination of John Roberts for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court on 9/5/05:
It was an act of utter gall by Bush to nominate John Roberts at all to the Supreme Court. It was even worse to nominate him to be Chief Justice (on Labor Day, no less). Roberts is reported to have assisted the Bush campaign in 2000 in the effort to obstruct vote counts via the courts. Roberts is also reported to have advised Jeb Bush on using the Florida legislature to attempt to override the established voting rights of the people of Florida in Presidential elections. George W. Bush continues to thumb his nose at the Constitution and American Democracy. This is similar to Reagan's nomination of Robert Bork, despite his improper firing of Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox in Watergate. Bush might just as well have nominated Katherine Harris or Ted Olson to the Supreme Court.
Furthermore, Roberts only has about two years actual experience AS A JUDGE, and only in the unusual legal environment of the District of Columbia. Why not pick a truly experienced judge who genuinely values the Constitution and American Democracy? Roberts's role in the 2000 Election scandal should be fully investigated and his appointment blocked, if the press reports about it are correct. (9/5/05, 9/10/05)
9/29/05 Note on the Senate confirmation of John Roberts for Supreme Court Chief Justice on 9/29/05 and subsequent events:
John Roberts, in an Orwellian slip, described both the White House and the Congress, each, as "the home of the Executive Branch". Perhaps subconsciously he was reflecting on the rubber-stamping of his appointment, 78-22, in the Senate earlier in the day, or on the rubber-stamping of other inadvisable Bush proposals in Congress. (9/29/05)
Note on the 11/9/05 "Presidential Medal of Freedom" Ceremony.
In bitter irony, George W. Bush had the gall to himself present Medals of Freedom to many prominent people on November 9, 2005. This was the sixteenth anniversary of the demise of the Berlin Wall, a major milestone in the collapse of the repressive Warsaw Pact and the fall of the Soviet Union. George W. Bush, on the other hand has been the personification of a derailment of American Democracy and Constitutional Rights, from his illicit entry into the Oval Office in 2000, to his Administration's spying on American citizens. The Center for Maximum Constitutional Democracy recommends that each deserving recipient of the Medal of Freedom publicly rebuke George W. Bush for his violations of American standards of Freedom and return the medal until such time as a person is genuinely elected, from the start, to the Office of President of the United States. The Center strongly urges that, immediately after the subsequent Inauguration, those honorees be issued new medals indicating their additional sacrifice, signed by a genuine President of the United States.
(Added 12/25/05)
A Comment on a recent problem in Texas:
Voting Republican is like hunting with Dick Cheney.
Advice to Democratic Party Leaders:
The immorality of the Republican Party leadership is evident from the content of this website. To lead America to the brightest possible "blessings of Liberty," the Democratic Party should not cede any moral high ground to the Republican Party.
A Biblical Quote for the Bush Administration:
"...the LORD will abhore a bloody and deceitful man." (Psalm 5:6b)
REFERENCES.
Clarke, Richard A. Against All Enemies. Inside America's War on Terror. (New York: Free Press (2004)), p.26.
Conyers, Rep. John. (Democratic Members of the House Judiciary Committee.) What Went Wrong in Ohio. The Conyers Report on the 2004 Presidential Election. (Anita Miller, ed.) (Chicago: Academy Chicago Publishers (2005).
Executive Office of the "President" of the United States. Budget of the United States Government. Fiscal Year 2007. (Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office (2006)). [website] [www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/pdf/hist.pdf (accessed 5/6/06)] pp.53-54.
Krugman, Paul. "Hack the Vote," New York Times," New York Times, 12/2/03 (Late Edition (East Coast)), p.A31. (quoted in Miller, Mark Crispin. Fooled Again. How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They'll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them). (New York: Basic Books (2005)), p. 63.)
Kuo, David. Tempting Faith. An Inside Story of Political Seduction.(New York: Free Press (2006)).
Liptak, Adam and Eric Lichtblau. "U.S. Judge Finds Wiretap Actions Violate the Law." New York Times, 8/18/2006, pp. A1, A14.
Lipton, Eric. "Former Antiterror Officials Find Industry Pays Better." New York Times, 6/18/2006, pp. A1, A23.
Miller, Mark Crispin. Fooled Again. How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They'll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them). (New York: Basic Books (2005)).
Palast, Greg. The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (New York: Penguin Putnam (2003)), pp.11-81.
Presidential Daily Brief of August 6, 2001. "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US." Washington Post. April 11, 2004, p.A6.
Sawyer, Diane. Interview of Katherine Harris by Diane Sawyer. (# P010111-01) Primetime Live. ABC News. Aired January 11, 2001.
Suskind, Ron. The Price of Loyalty. George W. Bush, the White House, and the Education of Paul O'Neill. (New York: Simmon & Schuster (2004)), p.291.
United States Commission on Civil Rights. Draft Report. Voting Irregularities in Florida During the 2000 Presidential Election (Approved by the Commission on June 8, 2001) [website] [www.usccr.gov/ vote2000/stdraft1/main.htm] (accessed 6/15/01), Chapter 9, recommendations 3.1 and 3.2. (Accessible 1/14/06 using home page selections at www.usccr.gov, such as via www.usccr.gov/pubs/pubsndx.htm [as of 4/26/06]).
Washington Post. (Editorial) "The August Memo," Washington Post. April 13, 2004, p.A18.
TO CONTACT US:
You may respond to this site using this e-mail address: info@maximumdemocracy.org
or use:
comments@maximumdemocracy.org
Latest updates: 7/4/06, 7/23/06, 8/19/06, 11/1/06, 11/5/05, 12/12/06, 1/18/07, 2/22/07, 4/20/07, 5/7/07.
Copyright 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007.
The Center for Maximum Constitutional Democracy
|
|
|
|
|
