holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

[metalman]

Vincent Bugliosi's opening statements during the House Judiciary Committee hearing on the constitutional limits of executive power.

[olivegreen]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

Shocking isn't it metalman. I watched this whole thing and took notes which I posted here but then thought better of because its political instead of financial. Maybe I'll dig them out again. I was thinking about how we were subjected to weeks of unending coverage of the OJ Simpson trial yet this inquiry gets very little attention. Where is the sanity?

OG

[metalman]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

Shocking isn't it metalman. I watched this whole thing and took notes which I posted here but then thought better of because its political instead of financial. Maybe I'll dig them out again. I was thinking about how we were subjected to weeks of unending coverage of the OJ Simpson trial yet this inquiry gets very little attention. Where is the sanity?

OG

i'd say go for it...

'This used to be the Politics Forum. At the request of members, we are turning it into an off-topic forum. If the rest of the iTulip Forums are about getting something done, this one is about getting something off your chest. The usual rules about members treating each other with respect apply.'
Rant and Rave Rules

[Verrocchio]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

I was thinking about how we were subjected to weeks of unending coverage of the OJ Simpson trial yet this inquiry gets very little attention. Where is the sanity?

Yeah, where is the Fourth Estate (the mainstream media)?!

[olivegreen]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

Okay then... here I go... I didn't start typing stuff until later so missed first part. Most salient points made by people are here I think but then I missed the end too... but really... it was fascinating... A loose translation giving the spirit of the thing now follows....

House Judiciary Committee on Executive Power and the Bush Administration

….
Brad Miller / North Carolina / D
“Democracy dies behind closed doors”

Walter Jones / North Carolina / R
“This hearing is about trust and the American people and whether they can trust their government… Dubya has 152 signing statements and 118 have contained challenges or objections… ”

Nine Witnesses

Elizabeth Holtzman author or “The constitutional removal of George Bush”
Former congresswoman of NY / Served during Nixon impeachment proceedings

“The framers develop the power of impeachment and put it in the hands of Congress to protect the democracy and as unpleasant as this is it cannot be ignored or shrugged aside… the buck stops here. I believe that there are grounds to make a prima facia case of impeachment of high officials…. 1) Systematic refusal to obey the law. (WMD in Iraq non existant) 2) Response to Geneva Conventions. (Torture) 3) Signing statements 4) Misuse of executive privilege (used to shield improper illegal improper executive branch activities) 5) Deceptions with respect to the Iraq war subvert the constitution of the US (Deceptions are rampant)

I believe the remedy that the Constitution provides and the one that is most appropriate to this situation is an impeachment inquiry.

Bob Barr, former congressman from Georgia 1995-2003 / R
Senior member on judiciary committee and reform committee

“Recent survey suggests people would sooner place their confidence in the postal service than the judiciary arm of government…. Specifics need mentioning Secret OSL operations not new but degree of depth and secrecy is new and very very troubling (Could lead to unprecented use of power in succeeding administrations)

Ross Anderson/ Former Mayor of Salt Lake City / D
The highroad for human rights

“Egregious uses of power by administration… illegal spying initiatives… illegal torture of detainees… etc… There has never been a more compelling case for impeachment. I urge congress to reassert its vital role to forbid any attack against Iran… Must ensure the horrendous damage (we’ve seen) never can be repeated…

Stephen Presser, Professor of Legal History

“For a president to be impeached he must have committed a grave offence, self-interest against oath to uphold laws of country….

… dismissal of United States attorneys… no grounds for impeachment here.
--- implementation of unitary executive… no grounds for impeachment here.
--- signing statements… no grounds for impeachment just change legislation
--- detention and investigations… within constitutional powers and oversight of congress
--- manipulation of intelligence and misuse of war powers… no grounds for impeachment
--- improper retaliation agaand obstruction of justice
--- misuse of authority in denying scrutiny of activities… too general… no grounds

“Impeachment is a radical remedy…. I see no evidence.”

Bruce Fien, Deputy attorney general under Reagan

“… the executive branch has taken its powers to levels of executive despotism. Here are three:

1) Presidents claim of war power… he asserts every square inch of the world is a war ground, he can use military force, law if he thinks necessary irrespective of what this branch can do. He can kidnap, arrest, kill, anyone without accountability… Can

2) Foreign intelligence, he can flout any restriction this body has on foreign surveillance acts… flouts ANY limitation on his power

3) Asserted the right to shield what he has done from any oversight from this body

“Quote: as the Roman Republic degenerated, the worst crimes were dared by few, practiced by more but tolerated by all…”


Vincent Bugliosi
“The prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder”

I present evidence that beyond all reasonable doubt …. can be accused of murder of over 4,000 young people. I have documentary evidence that when G. Bush told the nation that S. Hussein was a threat, he was telling millions of unsuspecting public what his own advisors six days before told him was not true..” Shows words deleted in the White Paper so congress and the people never saw this evidence. The terrible reality is the Bush Administration gotten away with this and we cannot let them get away this.

“With all the highly incriminating evidence you shouldn’t have any difficulty to making a criminal referral for murder… How DARE they do what they did. How DARE THEY!


(Interruption: Member: If there is an outburst you must adjourn this hearing… Presider: I ask that the hearing cannot give any indication of approval or disapproval of any of the statemtns by the witnesses…)


Professor Jeremy Rafkin, Professor School of Law
Renown scholar of International Law

I want to try to add a little bit of perspective to this. Others have suggested war in iraq was either a mistake or knowingly brought the country into a war for no good reason, this is the crux of the matter… all these other things are secondary to this explosive charge. Secondary charges are not unique to this administration, nothing new. Deep ideological divisions in country, the mood in this room is slightly demented. You should all remind yourselves the rest of country does not think the president is Caligua… these extreme interpretations… legislative process… cranking extreme response not good…


Frederick Schwartz
Brennan Centre in New York Unchecked an unbalanced

The largest problem, in our efforts to protect ourselves we’ve made mistake of adopting tactics of our enemies… waterboarding, and have abandoned the rule of law, checks and balances creating a constitutional problem… Consequence of what we have done, America is less free and less safe. By abandoning our values, we’ve given powerful tools to enemy in Moslem world… The full story needs to be told and the full story of the consequences of what have been done needs to be told. I recommend that Congress and new president sign a bill that sets up an independent investigatory commission to look at rights and wrongs done and make recommendations. Too late for impeachment. Could have been done earlier. I don’t recommend impeachment. We need to know full truth so we don’t repeat mistakes and for accountability, restore moral luster which is a great part of our strength. This might embarrass but the great strength of America is it confronts its mistakes. Conduct arose in context of seeking to protect country from further attacks, but at times the greatest dangers to liberty are well-meant but not understanding zealots… This process could bring country together.


Elliot Adams, Veterans for Peace

“Question to Benjamin Franklyn: What have we, a republic or a monarchy? Franklyn,: A republic, if we can keep it.” Sums it up for why we are here today. (We do wonderful things in the world… yet with all this work, we put this aside and began working for impeachment.) There is no question whether criminal offenses have been committed. Its about what each and every member will do about it… To let this go unanswered is in itself an offence to the rule of law… I keep hearing there is no time, no political will, political futures of parties…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.

Presider asking for brief thoughts on what they’ve heard.

Holtzman: The question is what can be done now? The only remedy is impeachment because NO ONE can interfere with it. There is no executive privilege here….

Barr: We used to have a nuclear clock to Armageddon. What we’re facing now is a constitutional clock. The disappearing bill of rights introduced into record with all lines blacked out. By God, I choose constitutional inquiry (over constitutional silence)

Anderson: Fraud committed by the administration (since I can’t name individuals) or high ranking official of administration, when people were told about the case for war, we were not told the whole story. The president… excuse me… a high-ranking official of this administration… [did deceitful things here]

Presser: The real question here, is the adminstration proceeding in good faith or proceeding for godknowswhat nefarious motives. I don’t see any nefarious motives. This administration has cooperated with this committee. What you’re looking for an absence of good faith and I’m not sure you’re going to find it. This administration has done the best it could in difficult circumstances.

Fein: I think the title of this hearing speaks volumes. It was Robert Jackson who said if you have a precedent unaddressed it will lie around like a loaded weapon waiting… etc… If we do not rebuke these powers they will hang around forever…

Bugliosi: Presser apparently feels that Clinton having sex and lying is worse than taking this country to war (on disputable evidence)… what form of logic lead Presser to this conclusion? Inference drawn… if Bush honestly believed that Hussein was a threat, the thought of provoking him into war would have never entered into his mind… murder… etc…

Rafkin: I wasn’t moved by other people repeating their statements with more emotion. I’m not selling a vote so I’ll pass.

Schwartz: I draw different conclusions from history than Rafkin. We’re relearning if you have secrecy and you have a lack of oversight you end up with two things 1) abuse and even more likely 2) mistakes. For the first time in American history the administraton take the position that the president has the right to break the law. If he believes the law gets in the way of national security objectives he can break the law and do so secrecy… this is totally unique and dangerous.

Lamar Smith: By my count the word impeachment has been used 30 times [even though it isn’t an impeachment hearing] Asking questions of Presser.

Presser: I don’t see impeachable acts.

Smith: Rafkin, if you look beneath anger, do you see impeachable offences? And why such a tone?

Rafkin: If people believed that the president knowingly got us into a war for reasons unrelated to national security… for I don’t know… oil, if that were true, that would be impeachable… Nobody has tried to explain that conspiracy theory is, they’ve only alluded to it… Why such a tone,… it seems demented. Really… the President is a Shakespearean villain, pure evil, you’d have to believe that all through the whitehouse people just say, I’ll just cover it up. Divided country leads to this. Tempers flare. People get overwrought. I think what we heard today is that.

Smith: If we were to use the charges we’ve heard today as a standard for an impeachable offence, what other presidents would be guilty of impeachable offences… Jefferson, Lincoln, Washington. I’d like you take your time etc….

Presser: The house has to be very very careful when it indicts political decisions. Tread with great care… etc…

























“

[Verrocchio]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

Thanks for posting this, M-Man. After watching all of the YouTube clips from the hearing, I agree that Bugliosi's statement is powerful. However, as much as I liked Bugliosi, I preferred the cool, reasoned argument made by Bruce Fein, all without consulting notes, even the quote from Tacitus. Brilliant!

[Mega]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

So, there are some good Americans...........but the MSM are more intrested in "American Idol".
mike

[Rajiv]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

See Also from min 18:30 to min 24 -- Vince Bugliosi from Part 4 of the Judicial Committee hearing

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

So the big beef Bugliosi has is that the US went to invaded Iraq on false pretense, i.e. no WMD.

Or so he thinks.

Check out this news report from the Middle East Times. Also an IBD editorial which says it much better than I could.


http://www.metimes.com/Politics/2008...to_canada/afp/

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArti...00323577877918


Iraqi uranium transferred to Canada
by Jim MannionPublished: July 07, 2008

Iranian technicians remove a container of radioactive uranium, 'yellowcake', in 2005. A Pentagon spokesman has said at Iraq's request, the US military this year transferred hundreds of metric tons of yellowcake uranium from Iraq to Canada in a secret, weekslong operation. (AFP Behrouz Mehri)

TOOLBAR
Print Story
WASHINGTON (AFP) At Iraq's request, the US military recently transferred hundreds of metric tons of yellowcake uranium from Iraq to Canada in a secret, weeks-long operation, a Pentagon spokesman said Monday.
The 550 metric tons of uranium, which was sold to a Canadian company, was moved by truck convoy to Baghdad's "Green Zone," then flown by military aircraft to a third country where it was put on a ship for Canada, said Bryan Whitman, the spokesman.

"The operation was completed over the weekend, on Saturday," Whitman said.

The yellow cake was discovered by US troops after the 2003 US invasion of Iraq at the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Facility south of Baghdad, and was placed under the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Yellowcake is a form of processed uranium ore that can be used to make fuel for nuclear reactors, or if further enriched as fuel for nuclear weapons.

Whitman said the Iraqi government asked the United States for help in selling and transferring the uranium to another country.

Cameco, a Canadian company, agreed to buy the yellowcake for a reported sum in the tens of millions of dollars.

The cost to the United States of transferring the uranium came to about 70 million dollars, Whitman said. He said the Iraqi government has agreed in principle to repay part of the transfer costs.

The US State and Energy Departments also played roles in the operation, Whitman said. But the Defense Department took the lead in carrying out the transfer, he said.

It took 110 shipping containers to carry the drums loaded with yellowcake, he said.

They were transferred by convoy from Tuwaitha to a secure facility within the Green Zone, the international zone, Whitman said.

Then they were flown by C-17 military transport planes to an undisclosed third country. Whitman said it took 37 planeloads to complete that portion of the transfer.

"At this intermediate location the cargo was loaded onto a US-flagged cargo ship, a military sealift container ship, the USS Gopher State," he said.

Whitman said the arrangements for the sale began several months ago, but the transfer itself took "weeks not months."

With the transfer, no yellowcake was known to be left in Iraq, Whitman said.

News of the operation broke over the weekend when Cameco acknowledged the arrival of the uranium shipment at Montreal.

Lyle Khran, a Cameco spokesman, said the company had responded to a bid request made last year by the US government.

"We are satisfied at having been able to remove uranium from one of the most unstable regions of the world, and to have transfered it to a stable region to produce our own electric power," he said on Sunday.

He said the yellowcake would be used at the Blind River and Port Hope nuclear power plants north of Toronto.

© 2008 Agence France-Presse
Saddam's Nukes


INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

| Posted Monday, July 07, 2008 4:20 PM PT
WMD: Hear about the 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium found in Iraq? No? Why should you? It doesn't fit the media's neat story line that Saddam Hussein's Iraq posed no nuclear threat when we invaded in 2003.
Read More: Iraq | Global War On Terror

It's a little known fact that, after invading Iraq in 2003, the U.S. found massive amounts of uranium yellowcake, the stuff that can be refined into nuclear weapons or nuclear fuel, at a facility in Tuwaitha outside of Baghdad.
In recent weeks, the U.S. secretly has helped the Iraqi government ship it all to Canada, where it was bought by a Canadian company for further processing into nuclear fuel — thus keeping it from potential use by terrorists or unsavory regimes in the region.
This has been virtually ignored by the mainstream media. Yet, as the AP reported, this marks a "significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy."
Seems to us this should be big news.
After all, much of the early opposition to the war in Iraq involved claims that President Bush "lied" about weapons of mass destruction and that Saddam posed little if any nuclear threat to the U.S.
This more or less proves Saddam in 2003 had a program on hold for building WMD and that he planned to boot it up again soon.
This is clear, since Saddam acquired most of his uranium before 1991, but still had it in 2003, when invading U.S. troops found the stuff. (The International Atomic Energy Agency seems to have known about the yellowcake in the 1990s, but did nothing to force Saddam to get rid of it. It's duplicating its error today with Iran and North Korea).
That means Saddam held onto it for more than a decade. Why? He hoped to wait out U.N. sanctions on Iraq and start his WMD program anew. This would seem to vindicate Bush's decision to invade.
The American Thinker Web site reported four years ago on the scary math behind Saddam's uranium hoard: 500 tons of yellowcake, once refined, could make 142 nuclear weapons.
But yellowcake wasn't all they found at Tuwaitha. According to the AP, the military also discovered "four devices for controlled radiation exposure . . . that could potentially be used in a weapon."
By the way, this should put to rest the canard peddled by the American left and by former Ambassador Joseph Wilson that "Bush lied" about Iraq seeking yellowcake from the African country of Niger.
Given what we know, including comments by officials in Niger's government, Iraq did make overtures to buy uranium. And it's quite possible all or part of the 550 tons came from there.
What's more, if Bush hadn't acted, we might today see a nuclear Iraq, an Iran on the way to having a weapon, Libya with an expanded nuclear program, and Syria — with its close ties to Saddam — on the way to having a nuke.
Of equal concern is why the media ignored this good news coming from Iraq. It seems to be of a piece with how they've treated other recent positive developments in Iraq.
We ask again — why aren't you seeing and hearing more about this? The reason is simple: The mainstream media find it inconveniently contradicts the story they have been telling you for years.

[Serge_Tomiko]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

The decision of Congress to remove the President from office is unassailable by any higher authority.

In short, Congress can remove the president for any reason or no reason. The only question should be: Does the president represent a credible threat to the stability and prosperity of the United States? If the answer is yes, he should be removed.

These talmudic arguments are unnecessary and cloud the real issue. Caesar himself hardly committed "high crimes and misdemeanors".

[Shakespear]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

I found the above story about yellow cake very interesting but troubling.

The uranium was found by US troops after the 2003 US invasion of Iraq at the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Facility south of Baghdad.

Why was this not in MSM or ever mentioned by the Bush admin. ? Was it not news worthy? This was under wraps since 2003 and not worthy to be used to diffuse the questions about why US went in !!! Uhhh, just doesn't go down right. :-)

It was nice to hear someone at the high level say that the country was ready to take Clinton down for Monica but steps ever so delicately around the abuse of power by the Bush admin.

[Rajiv]

Re: holy shit! vincent bugliosi's powerful opening statements

From Crooks and Liars

This article from the AP was posted yesterday, reporting the sale and transport of 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium from Iraq to Canada. Some of the leading right wing blogs were quick to hail the find as a significant victory for the Bush administration and proof of Saddam’s WMD program, but as Daniel De Groot at Open Left Points out, their celebrations may be a bit premature, if not dishonest:

I noted last night that a supply of uranium from Iraq had been successfully moved to Montreal in secrecy.

If you check into this, you’ll quickly find that the uranium a) was not weapons grade and b) was well known to the UN and IAEA and was being stored legally by Saddam’s government. It was legally in Iraq according to international law.

I wondered if the right wing echo chamber would use this as “proof” that the WMD claims were true after all. I got even better than I hoped, as not only do they use it that way, but they reveal how dishonest they are by the way they have done this.

Top recommended post at Redstate:

Yellowcake uranium found in Iraq, Saddam’s legacy, Bush was right!

Well…not so much.

Also from Iraq + yellowcake = ?

Relics of the early-80s nuclear program that ended with the Israelis bombing the Osirak reactor.

From the IAEA:

In the period 1979 through 1982, Iraq procured yellowcake from both Portugal and Niger and uranium dioxide from Brazil.

...

The yellowcake procured from Portugal was supplied in two batches. Batch 1, received on 20 June 1980, consisted of 429 drums containing 138,098 kg of yellowcake and batch two, received as three consignments over the period from 17 May 1982 through 20 June 1982, consisted of 487 drums containing 148,348 kg yellow cake. By letters dated 6 August 1981, 1 June 1982 and 21 July 1982, Iraq notified the IAEA of the receipt of this material, which confirmed the complementary notifications received from Portugal at the time of shipment.

In other words, nothing to see there.