Quote of the Day: “Under democracy, one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right.” Source: “Minority Report” (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997 [1956]), p. 222
Subject: A state of permanent preparedness for impeachment
It’s Election Day. What should we say about it? We’re tempted to declare it a day of mourning, but instead, we’re going to argue that today is the day to adopt a state of permanent preparedness for impeachment.
As of yet, neither a Democrat nor a Republican has been elected President. That outcome will be revealed later today. But before that happens, we should commit ourselves to closely monitor the actions of the new President, and to be ready to call for his impeachment, should that become warranted.
We should be prepared to do this regardless of partisan loyalties.
What warrants impeachment? Different people will have different standards. We plan to maintain a running “bill of impeachment,” listing broken laws, Constitutional violations, and abuses of power. It will be up to you to agree or disagree with the items we choose to list, and to decide whether or not any one item or group of items justifies impeachment.
It’s possible, given your level of sensitivity, that the new President could do something on his first day that would immediately warrant impeachment in your eyes, or that he will never do enough bad things to justify such an action.
The call will be yours.
Some people reasonably object that impeachment is too vulnerable to partisan ax grinding. There are also many things for which a president could be impeached of which the impeachers themselves will be guilty. It is precisely these concerns that prevented us from advocating the impeachment of President Bush. But . . . Read More »
“If the court grants our request … then if any law enforcement officer sees a Mongol wearing his patch, he will be authorized to stop that gang member and literally take the jacket right off his back.” - U.S. Attorney Thomas O’Brien
“The government can’t ban confederate flags, swastikas, or klan robes, and it sure as hell can’t ban the display of the Mongols’ logo.” - Marc J. Randazza
“What if the government had decided that, because of the Watergate scandal, nobody could use the word Republican again? - Zeichner Ellman
One of Liberty Maven’s Heroes of Liberty, Judge Andrew Napolitano appeared on Fox News’ The Verdict to ask the question, “Is the government we have today what the founders had in mind?” He discusses the issues of the day: Obama, McCain, the $700B bailout, Congressmen and presidents overstepping their Constitutional bounds, etc. Great video. Watch it now.
My purpose for writing this is that I view it as what should be a major political event, but instead I find there is a mainstream media blackout. As you read, understand to my knowledge there is only one corporate news agency that has reported this (FOX) has reported anything, and it was 5 days after the McKinney announcement. I want to know the truth, were people executed by the government during the Hurricane Katrina relief effort? I think that everyone can still remember how incapable that relief effort was. Please keep in mind that I do not pretend to know the truth here, I am just doing my best to document and report.
by Jake, the Champion of the Constitution Originally published October 5, 2008 at http://www.nolanchart.com/article5123.html
OAKLAND, CA - Cynthia McKinney, Green Party Presidential candidate, charged the Department of Defense with the cover-up of 5,000 execution-style deaths during the chaotic aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in September 2005 on September 28. She related that an anonymous mother told her that her son had processed 5,000 corpses, mostly male, with a single bullet wound to the head and entered the results into a Pentagon computer. The mother stated that the son had signed a confidentiality agreement and could not legally talk, and that the bodies were dumped into the swamp. Listen to her statement here. (photo)
The total death/missing toll of Hurricane Katrina was 2,541 per Wikipedia.
McKinney said in the same statement she did receive confirmations from “anonymous insiders” from the Red Cross and that McKinney said she suspected these 5,000 were prisoners of the state.
The federal government did not offer proof to the contrary. Lieutenant Colonel Les’ Melnyk stated that “The claim is outrageous on the very face of it and doesn’t merit any further consideration. It would be inconceivable that 5,000 people would go missing in America without anyone noticing it prior to this.”
After watching the first two so-called main stream party debates it is quite refreshing to hear a candidate give very direct answers to the questions he is asked. Bob Barr did that during his 6 minutes on NPR yesterday. Instead of talking around the problem and answering direct questions with subterfuge like McCain, Palin, Obama, and Biden, Barr answers with precision. That must almost be enough for some people to vote for the guy even if they disagree with him.
Project Hostile Intent as it was called aimed to help security staff choose who to pull over for a gently probing interview - or more.
ommentators slated the idea that sensors could spot people up to no good from their pulse rate, breathing, skin temperature, or fleeting facial expressions. One likened it to the “pre-crime” units that predict criminal behaviour in the movie Minority Report.
…
At an equestrian centre in Maryland, 140 paid volunteers walked through a pair of trailers kitted out with a battery of FAST sensors, including cameras, infrared heat sensors and an eyesafe laser radar, called a Bio-Lidar, that measures pulse and breathing rate from a distance.
Some subjects were told to act shifty, be evasive, deceptive and hostile. And many were detected. “We’re still very early on in this research, but it is looking very promising,” says DHS science spokesman John Verrico. “We are running at about 78% accuracy on mal-intent detection, and 80% on deception.”
AUSTIN — The Texas Supreme Court has denied Libertarian presidential candidate’s Bob Barr attempt to keep the names John McCain and Barack Obama off the state’s November ballot.
The court did not explain the reason for its decision Tuesday.
They aren’t even hiding it anymore. I’m speaking of course about our government’s propensity to cover up the darkness and paint everything as if the light was coming from the sun itself rather than a horrid blinky fluorescent tube. The latest bailout proposes to allow the federal government to spend up to $700 billion for purchasing bad debt from “mortgage-related assets from any financial institution having its headquarters in the United States.”
They have already modified the “having its headquarters in the United States” rule, saying that foreign companies with a presence in the United States are eligible for the bailouts as well. Well that should make those of us worried about U.S. sovereignty a bit uneasy. Of course that is now the least of our worries.
Also, the wording of the bailout proposal should make anyone concerned about federal government overreach quake in their boots. This bailout has been described as the Patriot Act for the financial sector. How can such a claim have merit? Well, let’s look at the proposal in more detail.
How well do you know the U.S. Constitution? Are you ready to test your knowledge? Thanks to Chip Wood’s Straight Talk, here are 25 questions to test your Constitutional savvy. Care to give it a try? (Attempt to answer each question before reading the answer).
Let’s start with the deadly soda, because we definitely all need to work together to proactively hunt down dangerous felons like this. Let me paint the picture. It’s an easy one. We’ve all had parents, at least two, anyway. And some of us have even cared for them when they got sick. And most of us have had a soda or two in our lives. So this should be pretty easy to picture. Natalie Walters, a lady who routinely takes her father to the Boise Veterans Affairs Medical Center for treatment, also decided to callously take advantage of her right to travel, and regularly visited the cafeteria. Her routine was to refill her mug with Diet Coke for anywhere from $1 to $1.50, depending on the cashier at the time and his or her ability to accurately type in the right codes and digits on a keyboard. Well, imagine her surprise on Aug. 20, when Walters filled her mug with Diet Coke, [and] the clerk charged $3.80.
“I told her that cannot be right and asked to talk to the manager,” Walters said.
The manager told Walters the price is correct.
Walters decided she didn’t want to pay that much and offered to return the soda, she said. But the manager told her there was no way to accept the returned soda and Walters had to pay. Walters refused, and she said she was angry by this point, and she poured the soda onto the counter.
The manager banned Walters from the cafeteria.
But, wait, there’s more! A LOT more! Officials realized their debt to the safety of the community, and felt morally compelled to go through every piece of cafeteria and hospital videotape, tracking her insurgent movements, tracing her back to her ill father; going through his medical records; and justifiably upsetting him by interrupting him at his own dental appointment to let him know that Big Brother requested his daughter’s presence.
Liberty Maven
OAKLAND, CA - 
