Share this
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Slashdot
Furl
Yahoo
Blogmarks
Technorati
Newsvine
Googlize this
Facebook
Wikio
Export PDF
Print
E-mail
Tagsby Stephen P. Pizzo
Maybe I'm just another outhouse
lawyer, but it doesn't seem all that complicated. I mean laws have been
broken and we know by whom. So what's the hold up? Why aren't these
people being indicted? Oh, I know we can't indict a sitting President,
but we can indict those just below him. And we should. But it's
important to get them in the right order.
First indict Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Once he's gone a real
US Attorney can be confirmed who has the ethics and backbone to indict
the next three on my list. (The President I leave to Congress to deal
with, should Congress ever find the ethics and backbone to impeach.)
So, here's the counts against each that should be brought:
Alberto Gonzales:
As US Attorney General
Count One:
Conspired with the White House's political director, Karl Rove and
others, to place partisan US Attorneys in key regions with the specific
goal of suppressing the minority vote by threatening and harassing minority get-out-the-vote efforts with legal action.
Count Two:
Lied under oath before Congress regarding the real reasons (as
enumerated in Count One) for replacing ten US Attorneys after the 2004
election for what we now know were strictly partisan political reasons.
Count Three: Lied
under oath to Congress about what he knew and when he knew it regarding
the events and actions taken under his authority in furtherance of
Count One.
Count Four: Multiple violations of the Hatch Act –
to wit, the use of taxpayer funded political facilities offices,
equipment and personnel in the furtherance of purely political
activities — once again in furtherance of the goals enumerated in Count
One.
Count Five: Conspiracy. For conspiring with White House official(s) in the furtherance of Count One.
Count Six: Conspiracy to violate the Voting Rights Act in furtherance of Count One.
Karl Rove:As White House Political Director and Advisor to the President.
Count One: Conspiracy. For acting in concert with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and other Department of Justice officials, in furtherance of the goals enumerated in Gonzales Count One.
Count Two: Multiple violations of the Hatch Act — the use of the White House and other tax-payer funded political offices, equipment and personnel in the furtherance of purely political activities.
Count Three: Conspiracy to violate the Voting Rights Act in furtherance of Gonzales Count One.
Condolezza Rice:As White House National Security Director.
Count One: Lied to Congress when she testified that she was unaware of warnings from the CIA provided to her in July 2001 that “spectacular terrorist attacks against the US homeland were eminent.”
Count Two: Lied to Congress when she testified she was unaware of the CIA finding that reports that Iraq had tired to purchase Uranium yellow cake from Niger were false.
Dick Cheney:Removal for Office as Vice President of the United States.
Count One: Conspiracy to commit perjury: Did knowingly and purposefully conspire with and aid and abet with others in the preparation and deliverance of perjured testimony to Congress with the purpose of misleading the Congress into approving a war of aggression against another sovereign nation.
Count Two: Conspiracy to violate anti-trust laws — to wit, holding secret, non-public meetings in 2001 with executives of American energy companies that fixed prices, stifled competition that later manifested in record high prices for energy products and windfall profits for fellow conspirators.
Count Three: Conspiracy. To wit: conspiring with other government officials to ensure that billions of dollars in war-related no-bid contracts were steered to companies in which Dick Cheney either held a financial interest or with which he had a prior executive relationship and/or with companies run by close personal acquaintances and/or friends.
Maybe some public interest legal group can attempt a citizen's arrest of Gonzales, Rove and Rice, file charges and force the issue. And the action can be framed as part of Bush's own “No Child Left Behind” program. After all, if there's anything children need to be taught it's that their actions, good and bad, have consequences. And what better way to teach that critical lesson than by letting them see that even the powerful are required to follow the rules. And that there are consequences when they break the rules — negative consequences.
Hope — if not justice — springs eternal.
To create link towards this article on your website,
copy and paste the text below in your page.
Preview :
Wednesday, 09 May 2007
Subscribe to this comment's feed
