Tag Archives: deceit

Joe Lieberman – gee thanks, Connecticut

Posted on by
2

There are some Senators who drive me nuts, but nobody more so than Joe Lieberman. Some years ago, I used to have a modicum of respect for the guy as a moderate. Now he’s a snake. At least my more-red-than-red Senators here in Georgia, Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, are predicable in their unthinking Bush loyalist stance. They can always be relied upon to vote exactly the way I don’t want them to vote.

Oh sure, Joe, let’s go into Iran now. And to think that you ran on a platform for bipartisan cooperation to end the war. You’ve lost all credibility with me. That’s it.

I can see why people in Connecticut are finally waking up and regreting re-electing Holy Joe.

David Sirota has a great blog post on Lieberman’s strategery…

During the campaign, we did all that we could to point out how Lieberman was lying about his position on the war through as many venues as possible – blogs, candidate speeches, and television advertising making the point that “a vote for Lieberman means a vote for more war” (an ad that Lieberman actually held a special press conference to attack for supposedly being not true). But in the general election’s stretch run, the independent validators in the race – the local and national media – refused to report on Lieberman’s actual positions and votes continuing to support Bush and the war, and this key slice of Democratic and Independent voters remained confused. They voted for Lieberman because they believed that he perhaps had been pro-war before, but had changed – when in fact the only thing that had changed temporarily was his language, but not his actions.

…

Had Connecticut voters had more information about exactly how Lieberman’s campaign to reinvent himself as an antiwar leader was a complete sham, that key segment of the Democratic and Independent voters might not have been confused, and the election – as the poll now confirms – would have gone the other way.

Meanwhile, some important voices within Lieberman’s own ingroup are calling for him to resign or to be “recalled”.

The chairman of Joseph Lieberman’s minor political party has asked state officials to determine whether the U.S. senator founded it last year under false pretenses and broke election laws.

“I think he took unfair advantage of his many years of incumbency,” said John Orman, a Fairfield University political science professor who took over the party Lieberman formed after losing last year’s Democratic primary to Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont. “He decided to run as a minor party candidate without actually joining that party, knowing there would be protection from the various officials in Hartford he’s been friends with for 30 years or so.”

… More recently, Connecticut for Lieberman asked the senator to resign from office for advocating a military strike against Iran. Orman said Connecticut for Lieberman was the only political party willing to hold the senator accountable.

One Small Piece of the 911 Puzzle

Posted on by
Reply

Information wants to be free.

Now we know for sure that NORAD and the FAA have been lying about 9/11, both in official testimony and in the media.

Here are the lies:

  1. U.S. air defenses reacted quickly.
  2. Jets had been scrambled in response to the last two hijackings
  3. NORAD had begun tracking United 93 at 9:16 a.m.
  4. Fighters were prepared to shoot down United Airlines Flight 93 if it threatened Washington.

Here is something closer to the truth:

  1. The military never even had any of the hijacked planes in its sights.
  2. United 93 wasn’t even hijacked until 12 minutes after NORAD claimed to have been tracking it, and the military wasn’t even aware of the flight until after the time it is said to have crashed in Pennsylvania.
  3. Fighters “chased” AA Flight 11 long after it had actually crashed into the World Trade Center.

    4. Even the compromised 9/11 Commission has problems with this, and although they lack the spine to act on it directly, they have referred the question of criminal charges to the inspectors general for the Defense and Transportation departments. Stay tuned.

    “We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us,” said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. “It was just so far from the truth. . . . It’s one of those loose ends that never got tied.”

American Understanding Dawning

Posted on by
2

We are an optimistic nation, a hopeful nation. Whatever our politics, we hope that our political and corporate leaders value our lives. This is a wonderful thing about America. But it does leave us somewhat open to manipulation, deceit, and betrayal. I think this Administration is disastrous to us in ways that are have been sufficiently transparent for some time but that many people don’t want to see or believe.

Fellow Americans, I do believe that more of us are beginning to understand. More information will only show how deep the damage goes.

Read, please. Read more. Ask questions. Find out. Pick an issue and find out everything you can about it – from different points of view. Put together your own ethical judgment – whatever it is. Become truly informed to your very best ability. Only in this way can we have a functioning democracy again.

Here are a few links to articles that I think are worth reading.

West Point Graduates Refuse

Posted on by
3

Applause to West Point Graduates Against the War for honor and courage. Their stated purpose is “to help reclaim the honor of the United States Of America.”

  • Instilled by the Cadet Honor System with a fundamental, longstanding respect for truth, we graduates of the United States Military Academy believe that honor is a basic attribute of character. That we are no longer cadets is irrelevant. We stand appalled by the deceitful behavior of the government of the United States and, in particular, its widely known malefactors. Lying, cheating, stealing, delivering evasive statements and quibbling not only has demeaned these deceivers and the United States of America, but has placed vast numbers of innocent people in deadly peril. We will not serve the lies.

At the top of the excellent listing of laws and treaties violated by the Bush administration, they note that “members of the armed forces have a legal and moral obligation to resist illegal orders, according to their oath of induction.”

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the “lawful command of his superior officer,” 891.ART.91 (2), the “lawful order of a warrant officer”, 892.ART.92 (1) the “lawful general order”, 892.ART.92 (2) “lawful order”. In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.

They have issued a call to action:

West Point Graduates Against The War: Now Is The Time
by James Ryan; West Point Graduates Against the War;
May 12, 2006

Cry “Havoc!” and let slip the dogs of war,
That this foul deed shall smell above the earth
With carrion men, groaning for burial.
Julius Caesar

Why?

We members of West Point Graduates Against The War stand appalled at the deceitful behavior of the government of the United States and, in particular, its widely known malefactors. Their lying, cheating, stealing, and rendition of evasive statements not only has demeaned these deceivers and our country, but they have placed vast numbers of innocent people in deadly peril as a direct result of their deceptions. We will not serve these lies, that is, we will not work for, be a servant to, provide for, assist, or promote the interests of this dishonorable administration.
By remaining silent we tacitly serve; we are no longer silent.

The illegal assault and occupation in Iraq has killed tens of thousands of innocents, both American, Iraqi, and others, causing incalculable damage to Iraq and the Iraqi people, as well as the reputation and honor of the United States of America.

The behavior of this administration is particularly odious since it makes mockery of the code of conduct instilled in us at West Point. “A cadet will not lie, cheat, or steal, or tolerate those who do.” This has provided us with a lifelong respect for the truth, and a sense of responsibility to do the right thing, even if that means admonishing our country’s leadership.

Our position may be counter to the opinion of many of our fellow graduates. Our views are most probably not the views of the official institution that is West Point. It does its work, we ours. Yet, we are undeniably full-blown products of that place, trademarked by the West Point way of
behavior. “Duty, Honor, Country,” the motto of the Academy, our watchwords, as well. And we express our views as an organization of graduates, as retired generals of similar pedigree express their own. The difference? There are more of us than there are generals.

What?

Admiral John Paul Jones, the father of the American navy, said it best. “I would lay down my life for America, but I cannot trifle with my honor.” This administration has done neither. Chicken hawks in wolves’ clothing, they have been derelict in duty, honor, and country.

Consider their sending under-equipped troops into battle under false pretenses, the widely-known ignoring of First Amendment protections of the Constitution, the “quaintness”
of the Geneva Convention, or Colin Powell’s ill-starred, mendacious UN presentation. Their lies and misleading statements, detailed in so many places, have become epic. They tried to make their case. They failed. Facts and time have proven these people untrustworty and incompetent. They lied, tens of thousands died, and that is a moral tragedy.

Shamelessly, the president of the United States mocks his own deceitful behavior at White House Correspondents’ Dinners. People have perished from his infamous words, and he and his ilk, and the ilk of journalists, all guffaw and wink and preen. Duty, Honor, Country? Be serious.

Who?

We are graduates of the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York who are against the war in Iraq, and any other future wars similarly premised. Our ranks include sons, daughters, and spouses of deceased graduates. All of us stand in common cause against the deceitful policies and lies of the Bush administration. We are heartened by supporters from all over the world, but particularly the American taxpayers who gave and maintain the life of the
institution that bore us into the adult world of service to our country. And, in that spirit, we now act.

We are not politicians, professional media pundits, retired generals, peace-at-any-price activists, conscientious objectors, Communists or traitors. We seek to overthrow nothing. Except the pattern of deceit by this administration that has so sorely damaged this country, its standing in the world, and the world itself.

We have no historic legacy of public life that we are out to maintain because we have had no public life. We are ordinary people, forged by one unforgettable unifying experience – West Point. We studied there, we trained there, we were inspired there. We are the voice of a growing band of men and women, graduates of West Point, not perfect people, but honorable. And we speak for the many who, because of their circumstance, are reluctant or unable to speak.

We call likeminded graduates of West Point to stand with us and speak out against the deceitful policies of this administration, and the resulting destruction of the honor of the United States, and the dissipation of its military.

Alarum and call to action

Say no to preventive war. Heed President Eisenhower’s words. “When people speak to you about a preventive war,” he said, “you tell them to go and fight it.”

Say no to torture. Demand that the United States government respect the conventions of war. We must lead by example, preserving some aspect of humanity in the carnage and devastation. Today, we gaze into the abyss of perpetual war. Be aware, as Nietzsche warned, “If you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”

Say no to the trashing of the honor of our country. Stay the forked tongues of this deplorable administration.

This is not a partisan issue. Both sides of the legislative chambers have aided and abetted this corrupt administration. We exhort everyone to stand with us and to write to their political representatives. We will do the same. Tell them that you don’t appreciate their silence on these vital issues. Tell them to support and defend the Constitution as they have sworn to do. Demand honorable behavior from all public officials. Tell them how you feel about what THEY have allowed to happen to our country. And tell them that we, West Point Graduates Against The War, sent you. Tell them that we stand with you. It’s the truth!

“Now is the time!” Martin Luther King said long ago. Indeed, NOW is the time.

We live on the precipice of yet another “arranged” war. This time it’s Iran. As in Iraq, the demonization is well underway. The dogs of war are foaming and gnashing. Deja vu all over again, or, as we used to say at West Point, S.O.S, “Same Old Stuff,” or words to that effect.

And all this in the name of homeland security. Please be serious. As Dwight Eisenhower said, “If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They’ll have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government.”

Today, we have clear intimations of just such a government. We think that Americans are not so easily cowed, and that the vast majority demands far more than a diet of false statements, and confinement in endless, immoral wars.

New voices can change the world. They always have. Stand with us!

James Ryan

Cofounder: West Point Graduates Against The War

More than 750

Posted on by
2

That’s the number of laws that Bush has claimed authority to disobey.

Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, ”whistle-blower” protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research.

Legal scholars say the scope and aggression of Bush’s assertions that he can bypass laws represent a concerted effort to expand his power at the expense of Congress, upsetting the balance between the branches of government.

The President’s job is to faithfully execute the laws. In his (or his advisors’) view, the Supreme Court’s job and the Congress’ job is really his job too.

I think that perhaps he’s spent a little too much time with the Royal Family – no, not his own, but the Saud variety. American boots on the ground in Saudi Arabia, protecting the regime of the royal family, acted as one of the first recruiting points for bin Laden’s terrorist network (despite his own ties) there. Our role in the middle east has been unpopular — supporting dictators, establishing military bases, things like that. Our decades-long protection of this family has been documented to some extent already – but I fully expect to see more revelations of just how deep our complicity has been, and how much it has really cost, as time goes on. Meanwhile, they’re raking it in even faster than ExxonMobil.

In any case, the expansion of executive power in this administration has been striking. They must feel very confident in continuing “Republican” power (They’re not really Republicans, are they…).

Here’s how it’s done, the modus operandi: Signing statements. It’s a form of crossing fingers behind your back, if you remember that children’s “loophole on a promise.”

Bush is the first president in modern history who has never vetoed a bill, giving Congress no chance to override his judgments. Instead, he has signed every bill that reached his desk, often inviting the legislation’s sponsors to signing ceremonies at which he lavishes praise upon their work.

Then, after the media and the lawmakers have left the White House, Bush quietly files ”signing statements” — official documents in which a president lays out his legal interpretation of a bill for the federal bureaucracy to follow when implementing the new law. The statements are recorded in the federal register.

In his signing statements, Bush has repeatedly asserted that the Constitution gives him the right to ignore numerous sections of the bills — sometimes including provisions that were the subject of negotiations with Congress in order to get lawmakers to pass the bill. He has appended such statements to more than one of every 10 bills he has signed.

”He agrees to a compromise with members of Congress, and all of them are there for a public bill-signing ceremony, but then he takes back those compromises — and more often than not, without the Congress or the press or the public knowing what has happened,” said Christopher Kelley, a Miami University of Ohio political science professor who studies executive power.

Here are a couple of examples:

Dec. 30, 2005: US interrogators cannot torture prisoners or otherwise subject them to cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.

Bush’s signing statement: The president, as commander in chief, can waive the torture ban if he decides that harsh interrogation techniques will assist in preventing terrorist attacks.

Oct. 29, 2005: Defense Department personnel are prohibited from interfering with the ability of military lawyers to give independent legal advice to their commanders.

Bush’s signing statement: All military attorneys are bound to follow legal conclusions reached by the administration’s lawyers in the Justice Department and the Pentagon when giving advice to their commanders.

Nov. 6, 2003: US officials in Iraq cannot prevent an inspector general for the Coalition Provisional Authority from carrying out any investigation. The inspector general must tell Congress if officials refuse to cooperate with his inquiries.

Bush’s signing statement: The inspector general ”shall refrain” from investigating anything involving sensitive plans, intelligence, national security, or anything already being investigated by the Pentagon. The inspector cannot tell Congress anything if the president decides that disclosing the information would impair foreign relations, national security, or executive branch operations.

The method of “no veto, then ignore with signing statement” is deceitful, especially given the way he does it. A Presidential veto can be overturned by Congress, but this cross your fingers behind your back is just plain infantile – not to mention creepy – and more than 750 examples is rather excessive.

“Ha-ha – take it back! Fooled ya again!”

It’s amazing to me that Congress is handing over its powers like this. It’s got to burn even the most rabid right-wingers a little bit.

Claim vs Fact – American Progress Action Fund

Posted on by
Reply

The Claim vs Fact database at the American Progress Action Fund is a great resource.

Each conservative quote is matched against well-documented facts, so users can get a more accurate picture of the issues.

Select by topic or by speaker.

Shelving Inconvenient Evidence

Posted on by
Reply

The Washington Post has reported on another W deceit. Like the Wilson situation, it centers on intelligence the administration didn’t want to hear as it was preparing for war. Like the Wilson situation, it bears the mark of Cheney more than it does of Bush.

“A secret fact-finding mission to Iraq — not made public until now — had already concluded that the trailers had nothing to do with biological weapons.” The three-page field report and a 122-page final report three weeks later were stamped “secret” and shelved.

“There was no connection to anything biological,” said one expert who studied the trailers. Another recalled an epithet that came to be associated with the trailers: “the biggest sand toilets in the world“.

When President Bush declared in 2003 that “We have found the weapons of mass destruction”—referring to two mobile “biological laboratories.” He said this despite the fact that the “evidence” had already been discredited. In fact, the leaders of a Pentagon-sponsored team had determined two days beforehand that the trailers had nothing to do with biological weapons, a finding they sent to Washington, where it was classified top secret. Meanwhile, for almost a year afterwards, the Bush administration continued to point to the trailers as vindication of its push to invade Iraq.

News of the team’s early impressions leaped across the Atlantic well ahead of the technical report. Over the next two days, a stream of anxious e-mails and phone calls from Washington pressed for details and clarifications.

The reason for the nervousness was soon obvious: In Washington, a CIA analyst had written a draft white paper on the trailers, an official assessment that would also reflect the views of the CIA. The white paper described the trailers as “the strongest evidence to date that Iraq was hiding a biological warfare program.” It also explicitly rejected an explanation by Iraqi officials, described in a New York Times article a few days earlier, that the trailers might be mobile units for producing hydrogen.

But the technical team’s preliminary report, written in a tent in Baghdad and approved by each team member, reached a conclusion opposite from that of the white paper.

Team members and other sources intimately familiar with the mission declined to discuss technical details of the team’s findings because the report remains classified. But they cited the Iraqi Survey Group’s nonclassified, final report to Congress in September 2004 as reflecting the same conclusions.

That report said the trailers were “impractical for biological agent production,” lacking 11 components that would be crucial for making bioweapons. Instead, the trailers were “almost certainly designed and built for the generation of hydrogen,” the survey group reported.

The group’s report and members of the technical team also dismissed the notion that the trailers could be easily modified to produce weapons.

The trailers may have been used to produce hydrogen, possibly for weather/surveillance balloons. They still bore the identification plates of the British company that manufactured the units and sold them to Iraq.

Related quotations from Think Progress:

BUSH: We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. [Bush on Polish TV, 5/29/03]

POWELL: We have already discovered mobile biological factories of the kind that I described to the Security Council on the 5th of February. We have now found them. There is no question in our mind that that’s what their purpose was. Nobody has come up with an alternate purpose that makes sense. [Powell, 6/2/03]

WOLFOWITZ: We — as the whole world knows — have in fact found some significant evidence to confirm exactly what Secretary Powell said when he spoke to the United Nations about the development of mobile biological weapons production facilities that would seem to confirm fairly precisely the information we received from several defectors, one in particular who described the program in some detail. [Wolfowitz, 6/3/03]

RICE: But let’s remember what we’ve already found. Secretary Powell on February 5th talked about a mobile, biological weapons capability. That has now been found and this is a weapons laboratory trailers capable of making a lot of agent that–dry agent, dry biological agent that can kill a lot of people. So we are finding these pieces that were described. … This was a program that was built for deceit and concealment. [CNBC, 6/3/03]

JOHN BOLTON: And I think the presentation that Secretary Powell made to the Security Council some months ago, which he worked on day and night for four or five days before going up to New York, is actually standing up very well to the test of reality as we learn more about what was going on inside Iraq. He explained to the Security Council and, indeed, showed diagrams of mobile biological weapons production facilities. We have already found two such laboratories. [Testimony before House International Relations Committee, 6/4/03]

BUSH: We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents. [Bush, 6/5/03]

POWELL: And I would put before you exhibit A, the mobile biological labs that we have found. Now, people are saying, well, are they truly mobile biological labs? Yes, they are. [Fox News Sunday, 6/8/03]

POWELL: I believe that they did have them and still have them, and I am confident that as we continue our efforts we will find these weapons, as well as the programs that supported these weapons. The mobile biological laboratories that were found and presented to the world, I think, is a further evidence of this. [Powell on al-Arabiyya, 6/23/03]

POWELL: [The State Department’s intelligence analysts’] confidence level is increasing. … And so we have been in complete open analysis with, you know, having a complete open analysis with the CIA, and the Director of Central Intelligence remains confident of his judgment. And frankly, I haven’t seen anything to suggest that that judgment is wrong. [Powell, 6/26/03]

POWELL: I reviewed that presentation that I made on the 5th of February a number of times, as you might imagine, over recent weeks, and it holds up very well. It was the solid, coordinated judgment of the intelligence community. Some of the things that I talked about that day we have now seen in reality. We have found the mobile biological weapons labs that I could only show cartoons of that day. We now have them. [NBC Today Show, 6/30/03]

CHENEY: We had intelligence reporting before the war that there were at least seven of these mobile labs that he had gone out and acquired. We’ve, since the war, found two of them. They’re in our possession today, mobile biological facilities that can be used to produce anthrax or smallpox or whatever else you wanted to use during the course of developing the capacity for an attack. [Meet the Press, 9/14/03]

POWELL: And even though there are differences within the overall intelligence community, the Director of Central Intelligence, examining all of the material with respect to that van and examining counter-arguments as to what it might be, stands behind the judgment that what we found was positive evidence of a mobile biological weapons lab, and it has not been discounted sufficiently. [ABC This Week, 9/28/03]

Liar Liar – What more proof?

Posted on by
16

Yesterday I wrote a very long and detailed post on the Plame leak situation. It had quotations and it had links. It had the whole history, the timeline, and it had several compelling points. Just as I was about to publish it, a site in another window crashed my browser. Bummer. I have really got to start writing these things offline. I’m just too disheartened to reconstruct the whole blasted thing. Since you can easily look up everything to do with it, I’ll just contribute my own thoughts to the public conversation.

I believe that Plame was outed intentionally, which is a felony crime if not outright treason. Either Cheney or Bush authorized it. I actually suspect that it was Cheney (with Rove?), and that the official story is a backdated version for coverup purposes. The outing of Plame was meant to punish Plame’s husband (Wilson) for stating the truth – and it was also a message to the intelligence community that they had better give them the “intelligence” that is wanted, rather than assessing reality.

Although people within the administration knew that Bush’s claims weren’t true – and there were efforts to remove them (including by Tenet), these claims kept getting re-added to Bush’s State of the Union speech, which was delivered. It was just one of the ways in which Americans were manipulated – playing on their fears to drum up support for our illegal and unethical invasion of Iraq. This has proven to be a disaster, and all of the people who were demonized for speaking their minds at the time have been proven correct. We took over in Iraq for reasons that will become abundantly clear in future, if they aren’t clear enough to you already (hint – permanent bases on the oil pipeline, Cheney’s secret energy meetings, Enron, Halliburton, record oil profits, corruption, fraud…).

Neither American lives nor Iraqi lives (remember, we’re “rescuing” them?) matter enough to this administration for them even to answer the basic question of what cause our soldiers are fighting for. Modus operandi: when in doubt, change the subject – when in doubt, use doublespeak – when in doubt, use your media assets or run commericals as news – when in doubt, change the “reason” we’re there – when in doubt, hide everything. If they had nothing to hide, we’d be getting a lot more information instead of being under surveillance ourselves.

To claim that “declassifying” Plame and leaking her CIA status to their kiss-butt reporter friends (remember, it wasn’t a White House press release) was in the interests of national security is an outright lie.

Tell me – how does disrupting a valuable source of intelligence, undoubtedly along with others who could be tied to her, help our national security? Isn’t it obvious that it is actually a serious breach of our national security? I wonder how many people died as a direct result, and how much real intelligence has been squandered. It is a felony for good reason.

When he was asked about this leak, he stood up and said he’d get to the bottom of it, that whoever was responsible would be fired. Fire Cheney and yourself, Mr. President. Resign. If there wasn’t anything wrong with what your administration did, you would have explained yourself at the time, not years later when Libby was in court.

Oh wait, we still haven’t really gotten an explanation from the mouth of the king. His sycophant messengers have just given us some spin, that’s all.

Whatever voting machines haven’t been hijacked yet will tell you our judgment – if that matters anymore. We’ve seen what the interests of the American people mean to you – that is, nothing at all.

Take a good look around. Our land and water are being polluted. Corporate interests are all but writing our laws. Our system isn’t functioning – ask people from New Orleans, ask people who have to face new interest rates, ask people who are working part-time in more than one job, ask people trying to navigate Medicare and Medicaid, ask the children who are left behind or who graduate from our schools with a substandard education. Many people who believe they are religious have been hookwinked into following false prophets who would like to see this country turned from the land of the free into a pseudo-christian theocracy – money-grubbers of hate and corruption are even attempting to start ‘em young with home schooling and bible classes in the public schools. People openly assert claims of empire and world domination. Now you’re deliberating whether we might use nukes on Iran? So what, we’re worse than Hussein now? Wasn’t that the ultimate no-no? Oh, and didn’t you just make a deal on that very topic? What was that all about?

I’m watching to see what happens in November. We know about the election fraud, the hidden programming in the voting machines. We know that even now Diebold technicians are making the rounds. With popularity in the 30-40 percent range, it would be very strange if the Republicans retained control of both houses, wouldn’t it?

So what’s on the menu? Planning to blow up a few more towers? Maybe a Bin Laden sighting in Chicago? A nuclear meltdown in Florida? A small dirty bomb in some suburban neighborhood?

Contact your congresspeople – it’s time for them to show some spine. We still – so far – have only the soft version of fascism. There is still a chance to use our democratic system the way it was intended.

Wherever you are, do whatever you can – while you still can.

How can anyone still support this President, this Vice-President, these cronies of theirs? What more proof do you need?

Vote. Vote. Vote.

Recent Posts: