It was tax evasion that sent Al Capone to jail…it was lying about Watergate that tossed Richard Nixon out of office…and it is the Valerie Plame affair that has finally resulted in the first guilty verdict against a high-level Bush Administration operative.

In all of these cases there were far greater crimes for which the criminals were not brought to justice. Though in the case of the Bush administration, the least ethical presidential administration since at least Warren Harding and possibly in the history of our nation, there is still time to bring some cases.

And this same Bush who said he would deal harshly with anyone found to be implicated in the Plame leak has so far refused to rule out the possibility of pardoning Libby (and it was almost Karl Rove).

Why there has been no serious move for impeachment is beyond me. After all, Clinton was dragged through it for lying about his sex life–something that while not showing him to be a very responsible person, didn’t really impact anyone except Bill, Hillary, and Monica.

The Bush-Cheney bulldozer on the other hand, has left a trail of misfeasance, malfeasance, and plain old incompetence on a grand scale. The wreckage spreads from New Orleans to Palm Beach County to Baghdad and beyond, and touches virtually every corner of society: corruption, favoritism, abridgment of rights, basing foreign policy on a series of lies, retaliation against critics, and on and on.

I will not repeat the long litany of High Crimes and Misdemeanors here; they’re widely available elsewhere–it took me about ten seconds to find this link, for instance–and this is only a partial list.

This gang of thugs should never have been allowed to take power, and certainly not allowed to keep it. But I am confident that even if this group of rouges who have turned the US into a Rogue State are not brought to justice on this Earth, they will need to account for their evil deeds in a different venue. And I, for one, am extremely glad that I don’t have the weight of such actions on my own conscience.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Yesterday’s New York Times has a very informative–and very depressing–article documenting the firing of several highly competent Justice Department attorneys, including Carol Lam, who got the guilty verdict in the Randy “Duke” Cunningham Congressional corruption scandal.

It seems that loyalty to the Republican party and willingness to play cronyistic games are more important than competence, if this article is accurate.

It continues to amaze me how the Bush administration gets its fingers into every little corner of things, always with the message that independent thinking and action are disloyal, and often with the message that competence is not valued as much as who your friends are. In one case, the times article claims that another very good prosecutor was kicked out to make room for some friend of Karl Rove’s with minimal legal experience.

Seven attorneys have been let go in the past few months–compared to just three in the preceding 25 years!

Says Adam Cohen, the article’s author:

It is hard to call what’s happening anything other than a political purge. And it’s another shameful example of how in the Bush administration, everything — from rebuilding a hurricane-ravaged city to allocating homeland security dollars to invading Iraq — is sacrificed to partisan politics and winning elections.

He then goes on to speculate on three possible reasons, none of them good.

And one more shocker that really crosses the line:

Even applicants to help administer post-invasion Iraq were asked whom they voted for in 2000 and what they thought of Roe v. Wade.

Is there no aspect of government that these thugs won’t wreck?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Alelujah! A journalism organization that understands that it is NOT the role of a free press to disseminate government propaganda without questioning it or evaluating the sources:

It is the policy of KSFR’s news department to ignore and not repeat any wire service or nationally published story about Iran, China, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia or any other foreign power that quotes an ‘unnamed’ U.S. official.

This was reported in Editor & Publisher, a well-respected trade journal for the media, and mentioned in the always interesting Weekly Spin e-newsletter.

I find this very refreshing–especially as the administration continues to ever-more-loudly beat the drum for war against Iran (apparently they have learned nothing from the Iraq debacle).

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Count on the Politicians to find ways around every ethics rule ever introduced. Sigh!

PRWatch found a New York Times story that shows the latest scam: legislators accept lavish gifts worth thousands of dollars, but they channel these gifts through PACs and fundraising committees. And at overpriced federal government prices, too–like $2500 for a pair of concert or theatre tickets.

Talk about meeting the letter of the law while completely violating the spirit…Is it any wonder why there are always cries to “throw the bums out”?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Huffington Post’s Eason Jordan nailed the problem with recent Iran “revelations”:

After weeks, if not months, of US official planning to present a damning “dossier” of incriminating evidence against Iran, and after this same US administration presented us with lopsided, erroneous information about the capability and evil intentions of the Saddam Hussein regime, the best the US government can give us today is incendiary evidence presented at a Baghdad news conference by three US officials who refuse to be quoted by name?

That’s disgraceful and unacceptable.

Yeah, you got that right. Disgraceful and unacceptable. There’s a book coming out about the coming war with Iran: “From the Wonderful People Who Brought You Iraq” by Craig Unger. I was listening to him on Democracy Now this morning, along with General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff–in other words, a major big cheese in the US military–who doesn’t believe the “evidence” incriminates the Iranian government (of which I am no fan, and nor was I a fan of Saddam–but that doesn’t mean we go charging in with guns blazing and brains left behind).

Scary stuff. Once down that dangerous and foolhardy road is apparently not enough for the Bush League. Or for the New York Times, which ran a Page One story yesterday with the unsourced allegations–by none other than Michael Gordon, co-author with Judith Miller of some of the worst pro-war propaganda in the run-up to the Iraq invasion.

To its credit, today’s Times features a much more skeptical article:

Even so, critics have been quick to voice doubts. Representative Silvestre Reyes of Texas, the Democratic chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, suggested that the White House was more interested in sending a message to Tehran than in backing up serious allegations with proof. And David Kay, who once led the hunt for illicit weapons in Iraq, said the grave situation in Iraq should have taught the Bush administration to put more of a premium on transparency when it comes to intelligence.

“If you want to avoid the perception that you’ve cooked the books, you come out and make the charges publicly,” Mr. Kay said.

The article goes on to quote General Pace, who also gets his own article on the subject.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Chris Owens has a really interesting blog post about Obama and Giuliani, about the power of an individual who thinks for himself and surrounds himself with advisors who raise questions versus the mentality of groupthink where advisors aren’t willing to question

As a black American, Owens also discusses–and dismisses–perceptions in the black community that Obama is “not black enough.” Fascinating.

I’m certainly not ready to make my choice just yet, but it’s early. Still, I see a lot of hope in the Obama candidacy–because he at least says all the right things (though his record doesn’t show so much leadership), he will attract capital and media, and he is a clear alternative to the warmongering, Patriot Act-supporting Hillary.

Democrats take note: If Hillary is the candidate, I and probably a lot of other progressive Democrats are likely to vote Green. The right will come out in droves to vote her down, but the left will not show enthusiasm, and she’ll be buried.

The candidate who most closely represents my own politics is Dennis Kucinich. I was thrilled to vote for him in the ’04 primary and will probably do so again. Unfortunately, he was ignored by the media and wildly underfunded. In short, his candidacy was utterly marginalized, to the continuing shame of the American media.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

The always-thought-provoking Washington Spectator has a very good article in the January 15 issue, explaining exactly why it’s not enough to provide paper-based audit trails to electronic voting machines–that instead we need actual paper ballots.

Among the reasons:

  • If the ballot is initially generated electronically, it is still hackable. If the ballot is generated by the voter marking a durable paper and then electronically counted (the system that has been used in my own town of Hadley MA for years), it is not.
  • Electronic machines that generate a paper receipt have various problems with paper jams, difficulty of data retrieval from a huge spool, etc.
  • Many of the receipt systems use thermal printing–that same icky unstable technology that becomes unreadable after a week in your wallet!
  • Electronic ballot systems with paper backup have caused numerous problems in actual elections, where voters reported that their choice didn’t show up on the screen, where tens of thousands of ballots didn’t register a vote (as in Sarasota County, Florida, or simply where the system is not well designed to enable voters to easily check their wishes against the receipt (and what happens when a voter wants to report problems anyway?). None of these issues even occur if we start with a marked paper ballot.
  • Most importantly, the physical paper ballots can always be recounted by hand if there is suspicion of problems. If they were generated electronically, however, and there’s fraud or error in the set-up, we have much less of a guarantee that the ballots represent actual voter intent.
  • Of course, scanners and tabulators can be hacked as well. Thus, I would hope for nationwide legislation not only specifying paper ballots on durable stock with durable ink, but also mandating a hand-count before certification; electronic scanners, counters, and tabulators should be considered nothing more than a preliminary, unverified, indication of the results–good for generating news reports but not to be relied on to actually elect people.
    Oh yes, and I think the cost of switching to these much more reliable systems should be borne by the companies that brought us these unreliable machines in the first place. It should not fall on the taxpayer to pay for the clean up of this very preventable mess.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    The Justice Department this week agreed to ease its tough legal tactics against scandal-tainted corporations, requiring prosecutors to get approval from Washington before seeking confidential information between firms and their lawyers.

    Hmmmm. Seems like the Bush Administration is once again drawing back and letting the foxes stand guard at the chicken coop.

    Now, I confess–I haven’t looked into this in detail, checked a couple of news stories–the above from the insurance industry’s point of view, and Democracy Now’s, which I heard on the radio but can’t locate in the archives. Perhaps the government has been going overboard on this. But I am skeptical.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    One of the things investigative journalists learn very quickly is “follow the money.” And that can mean both a direct trail of funding as well as who stands to benefit from policy changes a particular group is recommending.

    Given the naked self-interest of certain large corporations in the watering down of the Sarbanes-Oxley–or at least what they perceive to be their self-interest–it’s not a big surprise that the group advocating to weaken that bill turns out to be funded by the very people who see themselves as benefiting by pulling back the watchdogs.

    The Committee on Capital Markets Regulation, which argues that U.S. markets are suffering under overzealous enforcement and unwieldy rules, said it received $500,000 in financial support from the C.V. Starr Foundation. The charity has longstanding ties to Maurice R. “Hank” Greenberg, the former American International Group chief who was ousted from his post last year and is contesting civil charges filed by the New York attorney general.

    Two committee members, Wilbur L. Ross Jr., a private investor, and Citadel Investment Group manager Kenneth C. Griffin, contributed “a few hundred thousand dollars” more, Ross said in an interview. The panel was formed this year with support from Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., a former chairman of the Wall Street firm Goldman Sachs.

    The email version (thanks, Nancy Smith, for sending it) connects a few more dots:

    The
    report was funded by the Starr Foundation, which is controlled by Former AIG
    Insurance chief Maurice Greenberg. Greenberg was forced to resign last year
    after then-NY Attorney General Elliot Spitzer revealed major accounting
    manipulations and misrepresentations at his insurance company.

    The irony is, as I point out repeatedly in my award-winning sixth book, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First, that high standards of ethics are actually good for the business bottom line.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    (I am sending this letter by postal mail, with copies to my own Congressman and Senators). If enough people write similar letters, maybe they’ll actually do some of this stuff)

    Dear Rep. Pelosi and Sen. Reid:

    It is thrilling to be able to write to both of you congratulating you on the Democrats’ election victories and on your new positions in majority leadership.

    The Democrats have been given a window to make real change. I’m writing to ask that we not squander it. It is time for meaningful change on order of FDR’s First 100 Days–before the window slams shut and the American people once again have the sad image of a spineless do-nothing Congress, only this time with the Democrats in charge.

    The biggest issue facing the US is foreign policy. President Bush managed to squander a huge international reservoir of good will toward the US in the aftermath of 911, along with the entire Clinton budget surplus, and the Democrats must work to rebuild our standing not as a rogue state but as a leader among nations in the campaign for world peace and prosperity. Specifically…

  • Get us out of Iraq NOW! That troubled country will face a civil war regardless of how long we stay. The longer we stay, the longer and more bloody that war is likely to be. As in Vietnam, let’s get out and let them get it over with. Less blood will be shed than by staying. The only possibility I see for avoiding civil war is to divide the country among Sunni, Shi’a, and Kurdish factions—but that strategy hasn’t worked well elsewhere in the world (e.g., India/Pakistan, Serbia/Albania, Ireland/Northern Ireland, Israel/Palestine). Demand from the Bush administration an immediate timetable for phased withdrawal within 90 days.
  • Bring North Korea and Iran to the bargaining table. Use diplomacy to avoid additional wars.
  • Play a peacemaker role in the Israel/Palestine/Lebanon conflict–through which, if real progress can be made, it might actually influence Iraq toward peace.
  • Change the dynamics of the US role in Latin America. Right now, we’re seen as “the neighborhood bully.” It is time to form working coalitions with the promising new governments in that region, to identify and work toward mutual objectives.

    Another “elephant in the room” is energy policy. It is time for a Marshall Plan-style campaign for true energy independence, based on renewable and nonpolluting technologies such as solar, wind, and small-scale hydro. We need to see our rooftops as an energy (and possibly food) resource, and the government needs to put programs into place to make these systems affordable to those who can’t come up with the large capital investment necessary to eliminate oil dependence and reduce carbon emissions/global warming in the long run. These could even be loans paid back directly out of energy savings. Large-scale involvement would bring down the price, make it affordable to every homeowner, reduce or eliminate dependence on foreign oil and uranium, reduce CO2 buildup and thus global warming. I live in a 1743 New England farmhouse and even in this somewhat challenging environment, solar systems provide nearly all our hot water and a portion of our electricity.

    A third major concern is fair elections. For starters every American needs to know that if they are registered to vote, they will be allowed to vote, and that their vote will be counted accurately. This requires a Federal law mandating voter-verifiable paper ballots, hand-counted in open and supervised public session. But beyond this basic and fundamental right, we need to be looking at other electoral reforms. Top of my list is Instant Runoff, which would take 3rd parties out of the role of “spoiler” and into the same kind of meaningful force and alternate voice that they provide in other democracies around the world.

    Fourth, the role of Congress. In the last few years, Congress has not fulfilled its responsibilities to the American people. Highly dubious, extremist Presidential appointments are approved with little debate. Massive bills are shoved at members at the last minute, with no time for adequate review. And the Legislative branch has been largely afraid to challenge the continuous power-grabs on the part of the Executive branch. The American people elected you to be part of the checks and balances, and I trust you will help your colleagues rise to their responsibility.

    And finally, there’s the question of what to do about the many high crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush administration. Rep. Pelosi, I understand why you would not want to engage in the divisive and all-consuming process of impeachment–but at the same time, we should not give these people a free ride for the serious crimes they have committed–for establishing a culture of greed, corruption, abuse of power, negation of the Legislative branch, corporate favoritism, unnecessary and unjustified curtailment of liberty, an international role as a pariah who has created space for terrorists that never existed before…and the unnecessary death and injury of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis in a move that only strengthened the hand of our terrorist enemies. Perhaps the appropriate response is something like South Africa’s Commission on truth and Reconciliation, that holds the perpetrators accountable but does not divide the country.

    In short, there’s a big agenda, you have the support of the American people, and that support can be strengthened by an assertive program of action. I wish you the best of luck.

    Sincerely,

    Shel Horowitz

    cc: Hon. Richard Neal, Sen. Edward Kennedy, Sen. John Kerry

  • Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail