A $50 fine and no sobriety test?

C'mon.

Che's Lounge @ 2:

A $50 fine and no sobriety test?

C'mon.

If they are like most cops, they don't do sobriety test except at late night hours. He could have been under the influence of some medication that he's using to keep him from burning up in the sunlight though. Vampires are prescribed special medications, if they have the right connections.

how dr. king dealt w/ fear...

L.A. Confidential @ 7:

Why is no one warning the American people about the vegetables that they are becoming?

And precisely how would one go about warning a vegetable?

Charles @ 8:

L.A. Confidential @ 7:

Why is no one warning the American people about the vegetables that they are becoming?

And precisely how would one go about warning a vegetable?

Fox Snooze.

americans aren't vegetables, they're livestock.

Ron @ 13:

Did you get to listen to Obama's speech this morning?

Parts of it. It was amazing to see people overseas like Americans again.

MsJoanne @ 10:

Charles @ 8:

L.A. Confidential @ 7:

Why is no one warning the American people about the vegetables that they are becoming?

And precisely how would one go about warning a vegetable?

Fox Snooze.

I thought that was a "cause" of the vegetables. Faux Noise causes one to slump in a nearby chair and drool while staring into the screen without blinking. After several minutes, dim-witted, low level chanting can be heard. "We're the good guys. God bless Amurika. Death to libs. Libs are commie, pinko flamers...who are taking away our rights and turning our country into a socialist that helps people. Damn the evil libs destroying country. Must get libs. Beat libs. Kill libs. Kill, kill, killllllll.....eerrrrrr (drool, slober, drool, blink)."

Barack Obama in Berlin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAhb06Z8N1c

Charles @ 16:

MsJoanne @ 10:

Charles @ 8:

L.A. Confidential @ 7:

And precisely how would one go about warning a vegetable?

Fox Snooze.

I thought that was a "cause" of the vegetables. Faux Noise causes one to slump in a nearby chair and drool while staring into the screen without blinking. After several minutes, dim-witted, low level chanting can be heard. "We're the good guys. God bless Amurika. Death to libs. Libs are commie, pinko flamers...who are taking away our rights and turning our country into a socialist that helps people. Damn the evil libs destroying country. Must get libs. Beat libs. Kill libs. Kill, kill, killllllll.....eerrrrrr (drool, slober, drool, blink)."

Drool slobber blink. Huh? my beer's empty. Must get up and get another one. Gotta remember to get a new styrafoam cooler next week. Make a note to get ice and anudder caes.

That's great news! It's giving me the taste of a Rachael Maddow show on MSNBC in the future ...

Iraq's been banned
from the Olympic. Will Shrub say something now?

Now we know the sum of McCain’s real experience, a choice chooser of cheese

wonderful photograph of McCheesy making executive decisions in the cheese isle of somewhere he prob never has visited before in his life,
(he has servants to go buy provisions and misc stores for the McCain pantries) in the various McMansions.

cue the inevitable Monty Python cheese sketch, as a man tries to buy cheese understand McCain policys in a ye old cheese shop

ferrofluid (Obama 08) @ 25:

Now we know the sum of McCain’s real experience, a choice chooser of cheese

wonderful photograph of McCheesy making executive decisions in the cheese isle of somewhere he prob never has visited before in his life,
(he has servants to go buy provisions and misc stores for the McCain pantries) in the various McMansions.

cue the inevitable Monty Python cheese sketch, as a man tries to buy cheese understand McCain policys in a ye old cheese shop

The cheese in his fridge has less mold than he has.

Republican health care 101 for morons

or is this what happens when McNasty's meds wear off.

Che's Lounge @ 2:

A $50 fine and no sobriety test?

C'mon.

and it was leaving the scene of an accident too.

Ron @ 29:

dadams @ 27:

L.A. Confidential @ 7:

Why is no one warning the American people about the vegetables that they are becoming?

how can you warn people whose IQ is lower than rabbit food?

The veggies need a warning label.

We try to warn them, but they just label us fruits, nuts and flakes....it's all so cereal....

how many meds is mccain taking daily? how many are pyschoactive?

L.A. Confidential @ 7:

Why is no one warning the American people about the vegetables that they are becoming?

UNRULY CHILD mocks stand down Generation ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98H2Mch3f4o

Be careful when purchasing a Sony console. They might just be encouraging the Congo conflict.

bullfrog @ 6:

how dr. king dealt w/ fear...

CNN vs. MLK - A Video Critique ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12blU_HiX48

If anything, what Obama's speech today in Berlin showed is that America's saviors can come from the least likely places, or in Obama's case, from Kenya.

And what does that prove? It proves that as Americans, when we do right by our fellow man or woman, no matter their citizenship, nationality, ethnicity, race or skin color, in the end run, we are helping ourselves. It's time Americans became citizens of the world, embracing the differences that make us all unique and letting go of the fear mongering and the hate that divides us all.

That was an inspirational speech. I hope Obama will make good on his promise and change America's course by 180 degrees. I'll be voting for him come November.

Orangutan. @ 45:

CBS News omitted a second McCain falsehood: his characterization of Iraq war as "the first major conflict since 9/11"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200807240011?lid=469717&rid=11530943

The House Judiciary Committee releases witness list for Kucinich's Bush Impeachment hearing set for tomorrow morning.
http://rawstory.com//news/2008/Imperial_presidency_hearing_to_feature_13...

Iran ends cooperation with UN nuclear arms probe
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080724/ap_on_re_mi_ea/nuclear_iran

Will it be on c-span?

.

Conyers begins investigation of the Bush Administration Friday, July 25, 2008.
LIVE STREAMING begins at 10am EST.

House Judiciary Committee Hearing on Executive Power and Its Constitutional Limitations
Who: Panel One
The Honorable Dennis Kucinich, Representative from Ohio
The Honorable Maurice Hinchey, Representative from New York
The Honorable Walter Jones, Representative from North Carolina
The Honorable Brad Miller, Representative from North Carolina

Panel Two
The Honorable Elizabeth Holtzman, Former Representative from New York
The Honorable Bob Barr, Former Representative from Georgia, 2008 Libertarian Nominee for President
The Honorable Ross C. “Rocky” Anderson, Founder and President, High Roads for Human Rights
Stephen Presser, Raoul Berger Professor of Legal History, Northwestern University School of Law
Bruce Fein, Associate Deputy Attorney General, 1981-82, Chairman, American Freedom Agenda
Vincent Bugliosi, Author and former Los Angeles County Prosecutor
Jeremy A. Rabkin, Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law
Elliott Adams, President of the Board, Veterans for Peace
Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr., Senior Counsel, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law

.

Congratulations to Ben, who I very much enjoy when he is on The Young Turks with Cenk! Them are some big shoes to fill, but just be yourself and let your natural style win people over. As a film buff, I look forward to a new, fresh, and original pair of opinions to rail against or wholeheartedly agree with. Have fun with it Bens!

Congrats to Ben!

Hope he doesn't go all Michael Medved on us!

...and to think, I came to this thread looking for discussion about Ebert leaving his show and his replacement.

Huh.

Um, McSame?

HA HA HA HA!

Oh, it never gets old. Yeah.

.

Elliott Adams' Testimony to House Judiciary Committee

Statement of Elliott Adams
President of the Board, Veterans For Peace
House Judiciary Committee hearing

"Executive Power and Its Constitutional Limitations"

July 25, 2008

Upon leaving the Constitutional Convention of 1787 –
Ben Franklin was asked: “Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”
Dr. Franklin replied: “A Republic, if you can keep it.”

Honorable Representatives, in that single sentence is the essence of what this hearing is about today – "if you can keep it." Right now hanging in the balance, in one pan is our republic and all the principles that made the United State a shining beacon of freedom around the world and in the other pan is a totalitarian state and all the despotism that it brings.

In the armed forces we took an oath, the same oath congressmen take, "to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Now as veterans we still take oath very seriously. Which is why we are here on the Hill some of us gray haired and getting long in the tooth, but still defending the Constitution.

Veterans For Peace has members from every war our country has fought back to and including World War II. VFP is 23 years old, has over 120 chapters spread around the country, has an NGO seat in the UN, and a small share in the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize. Our members help 85,000 Iraqis get safe drinking water, gave 54,000 free phone cards to patients in 148 VA hospitals, help Agent Orange victims both US soldiers and Vietnamese civilians, aided Hurricane Katrina victims, supports schools and orphanages in Afghanistan & Vietnam, have worked extensively in Central American for freedom and fair elections, and bought appropriate body armor for soldiers in Iraq when the government could not supply it.

But many of our members have set aside all these other important works to defend our democracy by calling for impeachment.

There can be no question about whether criminal offenses have been committed by officials of this administration. The only question now is, what, if anything, each member of Congress is going to do about it.

There are those who say, "oh heck, there are only a few months left, just let them finish their terms, and then we can get on with our lives like waking from a bad dream." But we cannot afford that luxury. This is not about impeaching a few administration officials. This is about maintaining the structure of our government. This is about protecting the Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Principles, and the Law of Land Warfare. This is about defending the rights and freedoms of the US citizens.

This brings to mind the words of Ben Franklin "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

The officials of this administration have usurped power from congress, stolen the rights of the people, and by ignoring it Congress reinforces it and joins it. All future presidents of both parties will start where this presidency leaves off. For Congress to continue to allow the usurpation of power and the flagrant violations of the Constitution to go unanswered would, in itself, be a violation of the law.

While there is no need for re-enumerating the long lists of impeachable offenses committed by officials of this administration, I can not escape the visceral pain and indignation that we, who served our country in combat, feel when we find our own government condoning and/or committing war crimes and/or crimes against humanity.

I cannot believe that members of our government are trying to obscure and distort what is torture and what is not torture. What is human has not changed in the past 8 years. What is torture has not changed in the past 8 year. The saddest thing to me about the torture discussion is that it has obscured the central point that, except in the movies, torture does not work. We were taught, in the Army, do not torture, not only because it is illegal, but especially because it ruins the integrity of the information you gather. Simply put, any victim of torture will eventually just try to say what ever the torturer wants them to say. Put another way it is the very power of torture that keeps it from giving us the truth.

As Congressmen you have available to you some of the greatest constitutional minds. But I learned in war that sometimes too much information can make it hard to see the essence. With your permission I will highlight a few salient points.

Without impeachment, requests and subpoenas and contempt citations are ignored (Congress has been mocked by an administration that has repeatedly ignored its subpoenas with impunity).

With impeachment, witnesses are freer to speak, "executive privilege" is gone, and subpoenas must be complied with.

The Constitution discusses impeachment in six places and never once mentions other remedies like censure, criminal referrals, legislative "solutions", or even prosecution (except to indicate it can occur separate from impeachment). The drafters of the constitution incorporated impeachment as the simple and proper process for dealing with all high crimes and even misdemeanors.

Without impeachment there looms the specter of an audacious broad sweeping self-serving pardon, even one that includes, a constitutionally dubious, but not explicitly forbidden, self-pardon! Which would further erode Congress' place in the balance of power rendering it virtually irrelevant. The only thing a president cannot pardon is an impeachment and a conviction in the Senate. But once removed from office, he can pardon nobody of anything.

For us veterans, when our time came, we volunteered our very lives for this republic; for the principle of freedom for all, for equal opportunity for all, to defend the Constitution and the principles embodied in the Declaration of Independence, and to guarantee the opportunity for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Now, Congressmen, it is your time, and I hear there is not enough time! Now is your time, and I hear it will not be good for one party or the other party! Now is your time, and I hear there is not enough political will around you!

When our founding fathers signed the Declaration of Independence they were not worried about political will, or how much time there was, or about any parties' political future, they were just worried they were going to be hanged by the neck. But they did what was right. Now it is your time to standup.

Einstein said – "The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing."

.

Bruce Fein to Call for Impeachment at Judiciary Committee Hearing on Friday

Statement of Bruce Fein Before the House Judiciary Committee
Re Impeachment
Prepared Remarks for July 25, 2008

Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

If President George W. Bush had knocked to enter the constitutional convention in Philadelphia in 1787, presiding convention president George Washington would have denied him admission. Thereby hangs an alarming tale. The executive branch has vandalized the Constitution every bit as much [sic] the barbarians vandalized Rome in 410 AD. The executive branch has destroyed the Constitution's time-honored checks and balances and raced the nation perilously close to executive despotism. The executive branch rejects the basic philosophical tenets of the United States. It does not accept that America was conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that sovereignty in a republican form of government lies with the people; that there are no vassals or serfs in the Constitution's landscape; that every man or woman is a king or queen but no one wears a crown; and, that the rule of law is the nation's civic religion. The Founding Fathers fashioned impeachment as a remedy for attacks against the constitutional order.

I wish these words were hyperbole. But they are not.

The Declaration of Independence posits that all men and women are endowed with certain unalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Those rights are not at the sufferance of the executive branch, of Platonic Guardians, or of any government whatsoever.

The executive branch, however, has made our natural rights sport for its political ambitions and craving for power. After 9/11, the executive branch declared -- with the endorsement or acquiescence of Congress and the American people -- a state of permanent warfare with international terrorism, i.e., the war would not conclude until every actual or potential terrorist in the Milky Way were either killed or captured and the risk of an international terrorist incident had been reduced to zero. The executive branch further maintained without quarrel from Congress or the American people that since Osama bin Laden threatens to kill Americans at any time and in any location, the entire world, including all of the United States, is an active battlefield where military force and military law may be employed at the discretion of the executive branch. For instance, the executive branch claims authority to employ the military for aerial bombardment of cities in the United States if it believes that Al Qaeda sleeper cells and [sic] are nesting there and are hidden among civilians with the same certitude that the executive branch knew Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. The innocent civilian deaths occasioned by the bombings would be no more than regrettable collateral damage daily inflicted by the US military.

If the executive branch decided to place the nation under military rule, unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would be eviscerated. Citizens could be arrested and searched at random. Homes could be destroyed without just compensation if the executive branch asserted that they could serve as hiding places for Al Qaeda. Trials for alleged crimes would be by military commissions denuded of fundamental due process protections, for example, the right to confront adverse evidence.

It might be said in defense of the executive branch that it has not yet extended its claimed military power on a regular basis into the United States. The executive branch has directed United States forces to kill or kidnap persons it suspects have allegiance to Al Qaeda in foreign lands, or instance Italy, Macedonia, or Yemen, but it has plucked only one United States resident, Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri, from his home for indefinite detention as a suspected enemy combatant. But if the executive branch's constitutional justification for its modest actions is not rebuked through impeachment or otherwise, a precedent of executive power will have been established that will lie around like a loaded weapon ready for use by any incumbent who claims an urgent need. Moreover, the Founding Fathers understood that mere clams to unchecked power warranted stern responses.

After the British Parliament repealed the 1765 Stamp Tax by protesting American colonists waving the banner of "No Taxation Without Representation," the Parliament responded with the Declaratory Act that insisted that it retained power to govern the colonies in all matters whatsoever irrespective of their absence of parliamentary representation. That theory of parliamentary omnipotence, simpliciter, awakened a colonial fury that culminated in the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution does not require Congress to await the executive branch's actual imposition of martial law and the indiscriminate use of military force in the United States against American citizens before exercising the impeachment power against Administration officials who are unworthy stewards of the Constitution. Moreover, the executive branch has buttressed its claimed military omnipotence with the unitary executive theory. It posits, contrary to centuries of constitutional law and the original intent of the Founding Fathers, that any power that can be characterized as executive is shielded from review, inquiry, or checking by any other branch. For example, the power to wage war is an executive power. According to the executive branch, that means that Congress is powerless to regulate how the Commander in Chief seeks to attain victory in Iraq by prohibiting torture, invasions of Iran or Syria, limiting troop levels or permanent military bases, or otherwise.

The Declaration of Independence instructs that all just powers of government derive from the consent of the governed. And the core principle of self-government is that the people must know what their government is doing and why intelligently adapt, shape, and direct their political loyalties or energies. James Madison, father of the Constitution, lectured that a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power that knowledge gives. Democracy resting on popular or congressional ignorance is a farce. In addition, sunshine is the best disinfectant. The executive branch will be deterred from lawlessness, folly, or maladministration by the knowledge that its actions will be made known to the public or Congress in a timely fashion. The executive branch ceased authorizing torture once knowledge of the practice by the United States in the war against international terrorism entered the public domain. A strong presumption favoring transparency in the executive branch is a constitutional imperative. The presumption is at its zenith in matters of war and peace, as Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black underscored in the Pentagon Papers case concerning the Vietnam War; otherwise, the executive branch will otherwise concoct reasons for initiating or maintaining war and cause deaths to heroic American soldiers as senseless as the Charge of the Light Brigade.

The Founding Fathers were virtually unanimous that if permitted to be cloaked with secrecy the executive branch would distort facts and deceive the people and Congress by inflating foreign dangers manifold to justify resort to military force or war. As was related to erstwhile White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, only war holds prospect of crowning a President with fame and leaving his footprints in the sand of time by transforming the political globe or major regions. War also boosts a President's immediate popularity, heightens his control over information critical to political fortunes, multiplies his opportunities to favor his political friends through appointments and government contracts, and justifies spying on war opponents as enemy combatants or potential traitors.

The executive branch, however, has routinely invoked executive privilege to conceal what the executive branch is doing and why in both national security and domestic matters. The executive branch has employed secrecy to communicate a suboptimal level of candor to the American people and Congress about foreign dangers and purported justifications for war. James Iredell, later appointed by President George Washington to the United States Supreme Court, advised the North Carolina ratification convention:

"The President must certainly be punishable for giving false information to the Senate. He is to regulate all intercourse with foreign powers, and it is his duty to impart to the Senate every material intelligence he receives. If it should appear that he has not given them full information, but has concealed important intelligence which he ought to have communicated, and by that means induced them to enter into measures injurious to their country, and which they would not have consented to had the true state of things been disclosed to them -- in this case, I ask whether, upon an impeachment for a misdemeanor upon such an account, the Senate would probably favor him."

The executive branch deceived the American people and Congress by concealing material evidence discrediting the claim that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction or was in cahoots with Al Qaeda, chief justifications for invading Iraq in March 2003. The executive branch misled the American people and Congress about the true danger of international terrorism to elicit their endorsements for a state of permanent war. The House Judiciary Committee voted an article of impeachment against President Richard M. Nixon based in part on his deceit to the American people about a bogus internal investigation of the Watergate cover-up.

The executive branch has invoked privilege to prevent Congress and the American people from knowing the prime features and the putative intelligence benefits of the Terrorist Surveillance Program undertaken in contravention of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, as amended.

On the domestic front, the executive branch has invoked the privilege to conceal from the American people and Congress Vice President Dick Cheney's interview with special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald concerning the Valerie Wilson leak investigation. The privilege at its apex was never before thought to extend to vice presidential communications not intended for the president.

The privilege has been invoked to prevent former White House aides Karl Rove and Harriet Miers from even appearing before Congress regarding the firing of the United States attorneys and possible obstruction of justice or perjury, and to prevent White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten from responding to document production requests from Congress concerning the same. The executive branch's counter-constitutional theory of executive privilege is that the President can prevent any current or former executive branch official from appearing before Congress to testify about communications that were aimed to reach the President or emanated from the Oval Office. That would sound the death knell of congressional oversight and the public's right to know what their government is doing and why. It would have permitted President Richard M. Nixon to muzzle former White House counsel John Dean from testifying about the Watergate cover-up before the Senate Watergate Committee by reciting Oval Office conversations whose disclosures engendered Nixon's resignation. No decision of the United States Supreme Court has sustained a presidential privilege to deny information to Congress. Its assumption that executive officials will shortchange candid advice to the President absent an iron-clad guarantee of confidentiality is counterfactual. Every important presidential adviser operates on the assumption that what is said in the Oval Office might through leaks or waivers of privilege later appear in major media outlets. Thus, former CIA Director George Tenet writes in "At the Center of the Storm": "[T]here are no private conversations, even in the Oval Office."

The executive branch maintains that it is endowed with constitutional authority to gather foreign intelligence in any manner the executive branch wishes in contravention of statutory restraints imposed by Congress. The Constitution, however, obligates the executive branch to faithfully to [sic] execute the laws, not to sabotage them. The executive branch operated the Terrorist Surveillance Program to target American citizens on American soil for warrantless electronic surveillance on the executive branch's say so alone from 9/11-2007 in violation of FISA. The executive branch also claims power to torture, kidnap, open mail, or burglarize in violation of congressional limitations in the name of collecting foreign intelligence. The multiple victims of executive branch's authorization of torture, including waterboarding, are documented in Jane Mayer's recent book "The Dark Side." The executive branch's lawlessness made the nation less safe by deterring expert FBI agents from participating in key interrogations to avoid complicity in crime and alienating foreign allies like Italy whose sovereignty was violated by a CIA-orchestrated kidnapping of Egyptian cleric Abu Omar.

An American Bar Association Task Force on which I served issued a report delineating the constitutional evils of signing statements that I need not amplify at this time. It is another example of the executive branch's usurpation of legislative powers and scorn for the rule of law.

In "Federalist 65", Alexander Hamilton explained that impeachments would proceed "from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from abuse of violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be dominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done to society itself." There is no more important task for this Committee than restoring the constitutional equilibrium among the three branches that the Founding Fathers fashioned based on their unsurpassed insight into human nature and the inexorable degeneration of unchecked power into tyranny.

Sorry for the brevity [/snark] of the last two posts. But they are monumental in and of themselves and deserve full quotation for all to read.

I sure hope that C&L covers the opening shot by the House Judiciary Committee being made at the Nation's real Crooks and Liars... NO?

Dateline 7/24/08

Barack Obama:

Gives flawless speech advocating global cooperation and strengthening international alliances before 200,000 US flag-waving, cheering Europeans.

John McShrub:

Whines incoherently in front of cheese display about the unfairness of it all before 3 cheese department part-time employees (2 of whom needed the overtime).

Speaking of insane, if you have the stomach for it, here's an article and vid at ANP about the recent Christians United for Israel sideshow with Pastor Insano Hagee, Krackalakkkin Kristol, and the Incredible Liar Lieberman. There was restrained rhetoric (about Holocaust, Katrina, gays, etc) in public but then again some of the sideshow features were banned from the press. The bearded lady would have the only normal person at this gig.

woodguy @ 60:

Dateline 7/24/08

Barack Obama:

Gives flawless speech advocating global cooperation and strengthening international alliances before 200,000 US flag-waving, cheering Europeans.

John McShrub:

Whines incoherently in front of cheese display about the unfairness of it all before 3 cheese department part-time employees (2 of whom needed the overtime).

A good presidential candidate would have used this week wisely while his opponent was overseas. Instead, hot head McBush had a week long temper tantrum .

P.A. @65,
The name America is so, so... pre-9/11, NO?
U.S. Homeland seems more fitting for Today's Fascist Societies.

When has America ever been called the "HOMELAND" but since 9/11?

Post American @ 65:

We have become very balkanized here in the U.S. Homeland. I was reading comments on John McCain's Myspace site about how Barry Hussein Obama is a muslim. Have Americans always been so stupid about everything, forvever? The dark cloud of cognitive dissonance hangs heavy over the Homeland. This is weird.

http://www.myspace.com/nbcchrismatthews

And they are proud of being stupid. Here in Texas you will see pickup trucks with Bush, McCain, and Homer Simpson bumper stickers. To be Homer Simpson, stupid, and ignorant is cooler than being a fancy elitist latte drinkin f*ggot (using their words). The dumber McCain becomes , the more conservotard support he'll get.

Reguarding Robert Novak and his "accident":

In the 1970s i was a printer's apprentice in a building that was torn down long ago on the corner of L Street and Vermont. I was often sent out on foot to pick up or deliver proofs or other job related things and i often ran into a woman who was a bicycle messinger who flat out was nice to everybody and talked to everybody. Everyone seemed to know her.

A year or so later i saw on the news that she was doing her job in Georgetown and a dumptruck driver ran a stop sign and crushed her to death.

The driver got a ticket for running a stop sign. That was it. End of story.

If you want someone dead invite them on a trip to DC and get them in front of your vehicle and step on the gas. No real harm will ever come to you.

Ever wonder why the President travels in an armored motorcade surounded by cops?

Now you know.

Latinos like Obie over McCain by a huge margin.

.

Gitmo prosecutor repeats al Qaeda deputy's claim: Flight 93 was shot down on 9/11

GUANTANAMO BAY U.S. NAVAL BASE, Cuba, July 22 (Reuters) - Osama bin Laden's driver knew the target of the fourth hijacked jetliner in the Sept. 11 attacks, a prosecutor said on Tuesday in an attempt to draw a link between Salim Hamdan and the al Qaeda leadership in the first Guantanamo war crimes trial.

Hamdan's lawyer said in opening statements that the Yemeni, held for nearly seven years before his trial, was just a paid employee of the fugitive al Qaeda leader, a driver in the motor pool who never joined the militant group or plotted attacks on America.

But prosecutor Timothy Stone told the six-member jury of U.S. military officers who will decide Hamdan's guilt or innocence that Hamdan had inside knowledge of the 2001 attacks on the United States because he overheard a conversation between bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

"If they hadn't shot down the fourth plane it would've hit the dome," Stone, a Navy officer, said in his opening remarks, repeating Bin Laden's deputy's claim.

The tribunal's chief prosecutor, Col. Lawrence Morris, later explained that Stone was quoting Hamdan in evidence that will be presented at trial. Morris declined to say if the "dome" was a reference to the U.S. Capitol.

"Virtually no one knew the intended target, but the accused knew," Stone said.

(continued at LINK)

Q U E S T I O N:

Is the prosecutor planning to use the defendant's statement to prove that the defendant is knowledge and therefore incredulous?

Or is the prosecutor planning to use the defendant's statement to prove that the defendant is credible and knowledgeable and therefore guilty?

.