Category Archives: Bush

Just Another Lie To Incite War

Posted on by

It’s like Bush is so much expected to lie that it’s just acceptable, passes under the radar, even when it’s in an attempt to incite a WAR! Is there anything more serious? “So what? Yawn. Who’s gonna do anything about it?”
Remember Bush’s October statement,

So I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon. I take the threat of Iran with a nuclear weapon very seriously.

This statement was made after Bush is now documented to have learned from the most recent National Intelligence Estimate that Iran had abandoned any nuclear weapon development in 2003.
As Think Progress documents: Hadley: Bush Learned Of NIE’s Findings ‘In The Last Few Months,’ But Continued To Ratchet Up Rhetoric,

The central question in today’s briefing for Hadley was whether White House officials intentionally disregarded the intelligence community’s findings in order to bang the war drums against Iran. Reporters repeatedly pressed Hadley on the specific date when the White House learned about the NIE’s findings. Yet incredibly, he refused to give a “precise answer,” instead stating that it was within the “last few months.”
. . . The issue is whether the President himself lied to the public about Iran’s intentions, despite knowing that Iran was even “less determined to develop nuclear weapons.” In October, Bush told a reporter that Iran was trying to “build a nuclear weapon“:

Q But you definitively believe Iran wants to build a nuclear weapon?
THE PRESIDENT: I think so long — until they suspend and/or make it clear that they — that their statements aren’t real, yeah, I believe they want to have the capacity, the knowledge, in order to make a nuclear weapon. […]
So I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon. I take the threat of Iran with a nuclear weapon very seriously.

So to recap: Sometime in the “last few months,” Bush learned that Iran is “less determined to develop nuclear weapons.” Yet as late as October, Bush was still claiming that Iran “wants to build a nuclear weapon.” What did Bush know and when did he know it?

But, of course, impeachment is “off the table.”

Bush Demands Gas Rationing, Draft, Tax Increases For War!

Posted on by

President Bush today called for gas rationing, a draft and tax increases to fight the greatest threat the country has ever faced.
Bush to Democrats: ‘We are at war’

President Bush compared Congress’ Democratic leaders Thursday with people who ignored the rise of Lenin and Hitler early in the last century, saying “the world paid a terrible price” then and risks similar consequences for inaction today.
… “Unfortunately, on too many issues, some in Congress are behaving as if America is not at war,” Bush said during a speech at the Heritage Foundation.
… Bush said denial that “we are at war” is dangerous. “History teaches us that underestimating the words of evil, ambitious men is a terrible mistake,” Bush said. “Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them. And the question is, will we listen?”

What? I’m sorry? You’re saying he was asking for the right to wiretap without warrants, and nothing else?
Oh … never mind.

Bush Uses Injured Reporter As Prop

Posted on by

Over at All Spin Zone, “Welcome Back Bob. Now, STFU.”
Bush welcomes back Bob Woodruff, a reporter injured by a bob in Iraq. The Woodruff asks a questions, and Bush says,

“Just because I recognized you, Bob, doesn’t mean I’m going to answer your questions here.”

As All Spin Zone puts it:

(Of course, CNN obediently left out that part of the exchange in their report.)
In other words: “Thanks for being here as a prop for me, Bob, now shut the fuck up.”

The Fall Lie-Attack Started Today

Posted on by

Yesterday I said the lie-attack would begin this fall, but it only took a day. Yesterday I wrote,

This fall President Bush will veto a number of spending bills, saying that they spend too much money. This will be accompanied by a huge, orchestrated media campaign blasting out the message: “We told you so. Now that Democrats are in charge they have gone wild with spending.”
… There will also be an orchestrated campaign to convince the public that Democrats are making their taxes go up – because of the spending.

Today, Bush’s radio address, Bush sharpens budget attack on Democrats,

Escalating a budget battle with Democrats who control Congress, President George W. Bush accused them on Saturday of pushing tax-and-spend policies and renewed his veto threat.
“They are working to bring back the failed tax-and-spend policies of the past,” he said in his weekly radio address. “Democrats are failing in their responsibility to make tough decisions and spend the people’s money wisely.”
… Bush accused Democrats of proposing in the next five years the “biggest tax increase in history” though he gave no details how he reached that conclusion. “I have made clear that I will veto any attempt to take America down this road,” he said.

Let’s hope my other prediction – political prosecutors indicting Democrats – does not come true.
I left out one thing from my prediction: Republicans will block every piece of legislation and then say that the Democrats aren’t passing any legislation.
Update – News media plays along, check this headline: Bush rips Democratic lawmakers’ failures,

President Bush accused Democratic lawmakers on Saturday of being unable to live up to their duties, citing Congress’ inability to pass legislation to fund the federal government.

Statement From Libby Prosecutor

Posted on by

It is fundamental to the rule of law that all citizens stand before the bar of justice as equals.

Firedoglake has a statement from Patrick Fitzgerald, Scooter Libby’s prosecutor:

We fully recognize that the Constitution provides that commutation decisions are a matter of presidential prerogative and we do not comment on the exercise of that prerogative.
* We comment only on the statement in which the President termed the sentence imposed by the judge as “excessive.” The sentence in this case was imposed pursuant to the laws governing sentencings which occur every day throughout this country. In this case, an experienced federal judge considered extensive argument from the parties and then imposed a sentence consistent with the applicable laws. It is fundamental to the rule of law that all citizens stand before the bar of justice as equals. That principle guided the judge during both the trial and the sentencing.
* Although the President’s decision eliminates Mr. Libby’s sentence of imprisonment, Mr. Libby remains convicted by a jury of serious felonies, and we will continue to seek to preserve those convictions through the appeals process. [emphasis added]

No Choice But Impeachment

Posted on by

The Democrats in Congress have been trying to avoid having to face what we are dealing with in this country at this time.
We have a President asserting that he is above the law. He is backed by an authoritarian political movement that feels that laws should not apply to them, either. They have been and are working to destroy the agencies of government and fracture each and every one of the institutions of civil society. They have politicized the system of justice in the country to the point where we don’t just wonder, we know that people are prosecuted or left alone based on their political affiliations.
They have launched aggressive war.
The pendulum is not swinging back. This is not a normal time. This is not business as usual. We can’t think that impeachment will get in the way of “getting things done.”
This is about principles and the Constitution. This is about Rule of Law and democracy. This can no longer be avoided.
Watch your backs.

The “Incredible Burden” On Bush

Posted on by

Four years ago President Bush said, “bring’em on.” July 2, 2003, USA Today: Bush: ‘Bring on’ attackers of U.S. troops.
In today’s Washington Post – A President Besieged and Isolated, Yet at Ease,

“I don’t know how he copes with it,” said Donald Burnham Ensenat, a friend for 43 years … Rep. K. Michael Conaway (R-Tex.), another longtime friend who once worked for Bush, said he looks worn down. “It’s a marked difference in his physical appearance,” Conaway said. “It’s an incredibly heavy load. When you ask men and women to take risks, to send them into war knowing they might not come home, that’s got to be an incredible burden to have on your shoulders.”

Oh, please. We’re talking about this guy:

“‘Please,'” Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, “‘don’t kill me.'” I must look shocked — ridiculing the pleas of a condemned prisoner who has since been executed seems odd and cruel — because he immediately stops smirking.

So What?

Posted on by

So now the word seems to be rippling out about what has been going on in the Justice Department. Of course, bloggers have been shouting about how it was also going on in every department all along… And for once it seems like a few people beyond the bloggers actually care this time. I think at this point a majority of the informed opinion-leadership – all the liberals and even some of the conservatives (David Brooks on the NewsHour tonite, for example) – understand that the Bush administration has, basically, thrown away rule of law. The word “lawlessness” is coming up a lot.
But so what? We knew that. Great. Now more people know it. So what?
That’s pretty much what Bush is saying, too. “So what? What are you going to do about it?”
And that’s the question, isn’t it?
Meanwhile, what does the public “know?” – in contrast to the opinion-leaders I mentioned. I scanned all three network news shows tonite and there was no mention of this supposedly huge scandal on any of them (unless I missed it.)*
But even if the public found out about all of this bruhaha — and cared — again, so what? No one is going to prosecute anyone for anything. I mean, they own the Justice Department and that’s part of what this is about — blocking prosecutions. They replaced everyone with Pat Robertson graduates like Monica Goodling, and fired prosecutors who were going after Republican corruption so, please, don’t try to tell me anyone is going to be prosecuted.
The only “rule of law” solution available is impeachment. That ain’t going to happen — there are enough “movement” Republicans in the Senate to block impeachment even if it got that far.
So … so what? Rule of law was so 20th-century.

Watch your backs.

* Update – No, I didn’t miss it – the networks just are not covering it. Read Jamison Foser’s Media Matters and Carpetbagger on this subject today.