Wednesday, December 14, 2005

Justice is different for those of a different color


THIS MAN A MEMBER OF THE KKK KILLS SOME BLACKS YEARS AND YEARS AGO, AND JUST NOW WHEN HE REACHS THE AGE OF 94 THEY JAIL HIM NO EXECUTION....... BUT TOOKIE WILLIAMS GET THE CHAIR.... WHY?

CHARLIES MASON IS STILL ALIVE IN CALFORNIA PRISON INVOLVED WITH THE MURDERS OF SHARON TATE ACTRESS WHO WAS PREGNANT AT THE TIME NEVER GOT THE CHAIR WHY?





But when it comes to Blacks the investigation can be blotched they can not aford outside council or someone who will really look into the case and again how many Blacks are being murdered in Jail just like the good of days of Jim Crow?



Is Our Justice System Run by KKK Mentality? Why are more Blacks in Prison and more and more White Collar Criminals on the Lose with Judical Protection



Indeed today if you commit "Conflict of Interest" while within the walls of the Whitehouse, bring Gas Prices up and up because you have a direct line into the industry as a family run and owned business whereby your Khan can create price fixing and then profit off the returns via the future markets and other financial links the same thing that landed Ms, Martha Stewart behind bars but then her man counterparts continue to roll making more and more deals in oil and off the conditions of the people as they don't go to jail instead they go to a resort or just buy a island or two.

The Government within the United States as become a haven for those in power to collect, receive and contact trillions of trillions of dollars off Americans like we are there piggy bank.

Just today in the Chicago Illinois area the price of gas rose from $2.12 per gallon to $2.25 in a matter of half hour for no reason other than something in power needed more and more money to do us in without another plot. All of them are netting trillions and right under the nose of most of us in America.

Blacks and others in ecomonical classes are being forced into the streets because of the amounts of theft and other financial issue which impact on them forcing most into court, not bankruptcy court because they took that away.

Color the Law Black or White - High Treason is not Impeachment its a Crime Punished by Executive





Treason is NOT A CRIME BUT A BLACK MAN LOCKED IN PRISON FOR MURDER WITH NO REAL FORENSIC EVIDENCE IS MURDERED WITHIN THE SO CALLED JUSTICE SYSTEM

THE POLITICIANS AND THE ELITE CAN COMMIT TREASON WITH NO ARREST NOR JUDGEMENT UNDER THE LAW, DUE TO JUDICAL CLOUT!

BUT THE ACT OF TREASON IS AN OFFENSE WHICH CARRIES THE DEATH PENALTY BUT NOT FOR ALL.....





Yahoo.com News Please read this and click on to the link to read the full column



WASHINGTON - Columnist Bob Novak, who first published the identity of covert

CIA Officer Valerie Plame, says he is confident that Presiden Bush knows who had leaked Valerie Plames name to the press.



According to Yahoo New Service, Novak said that "I'd be amazed" if the president didn't know the source's identity and that the public should "bug the president as to whether he should reveal who the source is."

Novak's remarks, reported in the Raleigh, N.C., News & Observer, came during a question and answer session Tuesday after a speech sponsored by the John Locke Foundation, a conservative think tank.


Saturday, October 29, 2005


The Men behind the President - who are they and will we the people see justice in American ever again? You be the Judge.

He was Mark Hanna, the Ohio son and political strategist for William McKinley, who in 1896, ushered in a period of Republican Party dominance stretching until the New Deal. And so it is fitting that Karl Rove, a keen student of Hanna and McKinley, should take a major step toward a new realignment with a Presidential victory secured in no small measure by Hanna’s home state.

Click here to read the full article

While it is too early to tell if Rove has achieved a genuine or lasting realignment, even his opponents have begun to acknowledge an electoral shift. When Tim Roemer pulled out of the race for Democratic National Committee chair, the Associated Press quoted him as candidly admitting that the "Republicans are in the strongest position they’ve been in since the early 20th century." Or, in other words, since Mark Hanna. It is not simply that Republicans won the White House again. Rather, they won 97 of the 100 fastest growing counties in the country. Republicans made significant gains among Hispanic voters, and achieved modest but important gains among African-American voters.

Mark Hanna saw to it that Washington was ruled by business, railroads, and public utility corporations." President Bush's tax cuts have given over 93% of their benefits to large corporations and well-to-do households with over 250,000 dollars of annual income (about 10% of the U.S. households).

Two Down 28 More to Go Indictments on Corruption and Endangering American Agents Board Whose Next?


CRIMINAL INJUSTICE
AMERICA 2005

WHAT IF.......
By D'Anne Burley - Host of The D'anne Burley Show

A Black Man is Televised stealing a television in New Orleans,
the President and other Government officials
tell those within the Guard and Policing Agencies to Shoot to Kill...


A women kills because of abuse and physical harm commited
from a abusive husband she is locked away for live.

Terri Schavio's husband gets the Senate and others to adopt a
law to legalize the hospital to starve her to death
and cut off live support in a state where the Governor just happens to
be the Presidents Brother ..

The Governor and the President say they can do nothing
even thought they have the right under
Executive Orders to Release and Do anything
they want to do.

They are lawyers and know the loop holes in the Law.

A man who can not get work because of lack of education
and living condition without hope
decides to sell drugs he has 20 gram of drugs on him
and gets 10 yrs in jail.

The police in cities all over the country are
taught to stop Blacks and Spanish people
on the Highway
for any thing, some
PLANT THINGS ON THOSE WHO DRIVE
The people stopped have little or nothing

they
are forced to loss they're
rights to drive because of outrageouse Fines and fees

They can not go back and forward
t0 work because
they can not drive
which is all designed by the law makers

The Courts and The Townships
make the Money
The little guy is drown in bills

They change the Bankruptcy Laws
to make more Money off the Poor

The Corporate Bankruptcy Laws Remain the same

Only the wealthly can
commit crimes and go to Condo Prison
while others are placed
in dangerous conditions
with Roaches and hard Criminals
they are forced into the system
which is privatized to work as slave laborers in
A Prison Camp Enviroment
for corporations ....

the small business owners
can hardly make it


It was alleged by Gary Webb and others
that our Government was involved in
The Drug Trade
Which bought drugs into the
Urban Commities of America

Blacks are Addicted to CRACK and those
in government and businesses Make money off them..

Because those Addicted can't get off the drugs giving them

They are thus given other
addictive drugs to keep them in the system ...

The Presidents Family owns shares of
stock in Lilly Corporation

There is NO Equal Rights
They have brainwashed the Elite Blacks
to think they are involved and in the in Crowd
They see no problem
Once they are kicked out
or they're money is removed
They can see the light

Sammy Davis Jr., died without a dime
OTHERS IN THE
SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY
ARE SCANDALIZED
AND LOSS ALL THEY MONEY
LOOK AT OJ SIMPSON

Blacks are STOPPED FOR TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS
based on race
and mistreated by the policing Agents

The Police don't look for
Missing Black Children like they would others. .
A Black Woman Murdered is a Prostitute

If your Black come to them to report a Crime
they treat you as a
criminal not a victim
Myself in Dupage County

Racism at its worse

Jobs for Blacks go to those for foreign nations...

Those who are involved
in Financing our Government
are alleged Christians
Backed by Alleged
Christians
Who are ok
with this


The Bible States something
like
Thou Shall not Kill, Rob, and Steal From ones Neighbor

We say we are doing the right thing by
going into Iraqi to save the people
But instead we go there and Kill millions
and poison them with Deployed Uranium

A man speak out about
Irsael having Nuclear Weapons
Vanunu Goes to Jail for 18 yrs for Speaking the Truth

No one come to help him
No one in the United States Government

A Federal Agent From Ark knew too much
about Waco, Oklahoma City

and Sept 11. 2001

He speaks out
they Attempt to murder him
they set him up
and then lock up his son
on a Murder with no body, no evidence
Nothing for Life to shut him up
He knows Timothy McVeigh

They are all doing the Work of
God ....

The Government Sends in CIA Agents
to operate within Foreign Nations

They are the men and women who are
there to investigate the possibility
of Cold War and acts against our Country

Our Government sends
Joesph Wilson to become
an Ambassdor to Iraqi

He makes a Statement
Those within the White House did not like
They Decides to handle him

By playing Hard Ball
They place his wife
in Danger

and have CIA Agents security safety
Breached

They import and export
Drugs

No one goes to jail
They are untouchable

Those Elected are "Our Hired Employees"
But we treat them as "GODS AND KINGS"

They do it all because they can change the law
to fit they're Needs.

As we the People
Stand by and Watch !

THE CRIMINALS IN THIS COMMITED
TREASON
IF THEY SERVE TIME IT WILL BE NO ONE THAN
4 YRS and a BOOK DEAL
with TIME SLOT a
ON RADIO AND TELEVISION


OVER 80% OF
PRISONERS in US jails
are BLACK why is that?


WE ARE SLAVES!

The Acts of Treason
and
Endangerment of America Lives
When will we demand
they be removed!

Former Ambassdor Joseph Wilson
was concerned about the issue of the alleged "Weapons of Mass Destruction"
and the issue of
"YELLOW CAKE URANIUM"
that the US reported that Iraqi had, and issue a statement whereas
the "COLD WAR" began from within the White house, with the
alleged target of this war being Wilson's wife and her Agents.
90 agents were in Jeopardy, which can be called "Acts of Treason Against America."
But the alleged released of secret information came via an e-mail which traveled
into the hands of the press,
Was the release of the e-mail to the press used just to get back at Wilson by way of his wife Valerie Plame?
You be the Judge please Read on.

WHAT HAS OUR GOVERNMENT
DONE?OCTOBER 30TH, 2005
CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL STORY

AP - 40 minutes ago WASHINGTON - The Senate Democratic leader said Sunday that presidential adviser Karl Rove should resign because of his role in exposing an undercover CIA officer, and a veteran Republican senator said President Bush needs "new blood" in his White House. Rove has not been charged, but he continues to be investigated in the CIA leaks case that brought the indictment and resignation Friday of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, an adviser to Bush and the top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney.


Scooter Libby Quits!
SCOOTER LIBBY
INDICTED AND QUITS POST THE
COVERUP GAME
PAWNS AND PLAYERS
THE INDICTMENT OF SCOOTER LIBBY
WILL OTHERS GO FREE?
USING EXECUTIVE ORDERS AND A VERY CONNECTED
COURT SYSTEM


The Court Brief below indicts Scooter Libby, but what about Karl Rove and other top Whitehouse Officals and then Bob Novak who was on the top of the list of those who took very sensitive information and reported on



Office of Special Counsel

Patrick J. Fitzgerald Special Counsel Chicago Office: Dirksen Federal Building 219 South Dearborn Street,Fifth Floor Chicago, Illinois 60604

Brief Bio: Fitzgerald attended Amherst College and graduated from Harvard Law School in 1985. After practicing civil law, he became an Assistant United States Attorney in New York in 1988.

He handled drug-trafficking cases and in 1993 helped prosecute John Gambino of the Gambino mafia family.



In 1994, he became the prosecutor in the case against Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and 11 other individuals charged in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.In 1996, Fitzgerald became the National Security Coordinator for the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. There, he served on a team of prosecutors investigating Osama bin Laden.[4] He served as chief counsel in prosecutions related to the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Africa.



Patrick Fitzgerald was nominated for his position as U.S. Attorney on September 19, 2001 on the recommendation of U.S. Senator Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL), and confirmed on October 24, 2001. Peter Fitzgerald and Patrick Fitzgerald are not related.

Note from D'Anne Burley - Former Senator Peter Fitzgerald, had to know the levels of corruption and placed Patrick Fitzgerald in to place in hopes to clear house, but the levels of corruption is so deep within every fiber of our Government can the Special Council, make a dent in it, without the support from the public. there are rumours that the power house wants him out fast.

The power house is the dollars coming out of the GOP itself, because he is attacking they're Infrastructure.

Peter Fitzgerald. The 44-year-old maverick Republican is choosing to retire after one term in part because his brave crusade against political cronyism had so alienated key figures in his own party that the GOP state committee actually declined to endorse him for re-election.

Washington Office Bond Federal Building 1400 New York Avenue NW, Ninth Floor Washington, DC 20530 Please address all correspondence to the Washington Office FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FRIDAY OCTOBER 28, 2005 www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc PRESS CONTACT: Randall Samborn (312) 613-6700 (312) 353-5318






WHITE HOUSE OFFICIAL I. LEWIS LIBBY INDICTED ON OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, FALSE STATEMENT AND PERJURY CHARGES RELATING TO LEAK OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION REVEALING CIA OFFICER’S IDENTITY

WASHINGTON – Senior White House official I. Lewis Libby was indicted today on obstruction of justice, false statement and perjury charges for allegedly lying about how and when in 2003 he learned and subsequently disclosed to reporters then-classified information concerning the employment of Valerie Wilson by the Central Intelligence Agency.
Libby was charged with one count of obstruction of justice, two counts of perjury and two counts of making false statements in a five-count indictment returned today by a federal grand jury as its term expired
announced Justice Department Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald. The defendant, also known as "Scooter" Libby, has served since January 20, 2001, as Assistant to the President, Chief of Staff to the Vice President, and Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs. Libby, 55, will be arraigned at a later date in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The charges allege that Libby lied to FBI agents who interviewed him on October 14 and November 26, 2003; committed perjury while testifying under oath before the grand jury on March 5 and March 24, 2004; and engaged in obstruction of justice by impeding the grand jury’s investigation into the unauthorized disclosure – or "leaking" – of Valerie Wilson’s affiliation with the CIA to various reporters in the spring of 2003.

Beginning in late May 2003, Libby allegedly began acquiring information about a 2002 trip to the African country of Niger by Joseph Wilson, a former United States Ambassador and career State Department official, to investigate allegations concerning efforts by the former government of Iraq to acquire uranium yellowcake, a processed form of uranium ore. The CIA decided on its own initiative to send Wilson to Niger after an inquiry to the CIA by the Vice President concerning certain intelligence reporting. Wilson orally reported his findings to the CIA upon his return. Subsequently, Libby allegedly lied about information he discussed about the CIA employment of Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, in conversations Libbyhad in June and July2003 with threenews reporters – Tim Russert of NBC News, Matt Cooper of Time magazine, and Judith Miller of The New York Times.

Prior to July 14, 2003, Valerie Wilson’s employment status was classified. Prior to that date, her affiliation with the CIA was not common knowledge outside the intelligence community. Disclosure of classified information about an individual’s employment by the CIA has the potential to damage the national security in ways that range from preventing that individual’s future use in a covert capacity, to compromising intelligence-gathering methods and operations, and endangering the safety of CIA employees and those who deal with them, the indictment states.

"When citizens testify before grand juries theyarerequired to tell the truth," Mr. Fitzgerald said. "Without the truth, our criminal justice system cannot serve our nation or its citizens. The requirement to tell the truth applies equally to all citizens, including persons who hold high positions in government. In an investigation concerning the compromise of a CIA officer’s identity, it is especially important that grand jurors learn what really happened. The indictment returned today alleges that the efforts of the 2 grand jury to investigate such a leak were obstructed when Mr. Libby lied about how and when he learned and subsequently disclosed classified information about Valerie Wilson," he added.

Mr. Fitzgerald announced the charges with John C. Eckenrode Special Agent-in-Charge of the Philadelphia Field Office of the FBI and the lead agent in the investigation. The Washington Field Office and the Inspection Division of the FBI assisted in the investigation.
The indictment alleges that Libby had frequent access to classified information and frequently spoke with officials of the U.S. intelligence community and other government officials regarding sensitive national security matters. With his responsibilities for national security matters, Libby held security clearances giving him access to classified information. Libby was obligated by federal criminal statute, regulations, executive orders, and a written non-disclosure agreement not to disclose classified information to unauthorized persons, and to properly safeguard classified information against unauthorized disclosure.

According to the indictment, on September 26, 2003, the Department of Justice and the FBI began a criminal investigation into the possible unauthorized disclosure of classified information regarding Valerie Wilson’s CIA affiliation to various reporters in the spring of 2003. In January 2004, the grand jury investigation began examining possible violations of criminal laws prohibiting disclosing the identity of covert intelligence personnel (The Intelligence Identities Protection Act), improperly disclosing national defense information, making false statements to government agents, and perjury. A major focus of the grand jury investigation was to determine which government officials had disclosed to the media prior to July 14, 2003, information concerning Valerie Wilson’s CIA affiliation, and the nature, timing, extent, and purpose of such disclosures, as well as whether any official made such a disclosure knowing that Valerie Wilson’s employment by the CIA was classified information.

3 The over-arching obstruction of justice count alleges that while testifying under oath before the grand jury on March 5 and March 24 2004, Libby knowingly and corruptly endeavored to influence, obstruct and impede the grand jury’s investigation by misleading and deceiving the grand jury as to when, and the manner and means by which, he acquired, and subsequently disclosed to the media, information concerning the employment of Valerie Wilson by the CIA. The obstruction count alleges that Libby made the following materially false and intentionally misleading statements:

<>
Rather, Libby confirmed to Cooper, without qualification, that Libby had heard that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA; and Libby advised Judith Miller of The New York Times on or about July 12, 2003, that he had heard that other reporters were saying that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA but Libby did not know whether that assertion was true; when, in fact, Libby did not advise Miller during that conversation that Libby had heard other reporters were saying that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, nor did Libby advise her that Libby did not know whether this assertion was true. Among the events leading up to these conversations, on January 28, 2003, President Bush delivered his State of the Union address which included sixteen words asserting that "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." 4 On May 6, 2003, The New York Times published a column by Nicholas Kristof which disputed the accuracy of the "sixteen words" in the State of the Union address. The column reported that, following a request from the Vice President’s office for an investigation of allegations that Iraq sought to buy uranium from Niger, an unnamed former ambassador was sent to Niger in 2002 to investigate the allegations. According to the column, the ambassador reported back to the CIA and State Department in early 2002 that the allegations were unequivocally wrong and based on forged documents. According to the indictment, beginning in late May and throughout June, Libby participated in multiple conversations concerning Valerie Wilson’s employment by the CIA, including on the following occasions:
• on or about May 29, 2003, in the White House, Libby asked an Undersecretary of State for information concerning the unnamed ambassador’s travel to Niger.
The Undersecretary thereafter directed the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research to prepare a report concerning the ambassador and his trip. The Undersecretary provided Libby with interim oral reports in late May and early June 2003, and advised Libby that Wilson was the former ambassador who took the trip; • on or about June 9, 2003, a number of classified documents from the CIA were faxed to the Office of the Vice President to the personal attention of Libby and another person in the Vice President’s office. The documents, which bore classification markings, discussed, among other things, Wilson and his trip to Niger, but did not mention Wilson by name. After receiving these documents, Libby and one or more other persons in the Vice President’s office handwrote the names "Wilson" and "Joe Wilson" on the documents;
• on or about June 11 or 12, 2003, Libby was orally advised by the Undersecretary of State that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA and that State Department personnel were saying that Wilson’s wife was involved in the organization of his trip;
• on or about June 11, 2003, Libby was informed by a senior officer of the CIA that Wilson’s wife was employed by the CIA and was believed to be responsible for sending Wilson on the trip;
5 • prior to June 12, 2003, Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus contacted the Office of the Vice President about a story he was writing about Wilson’s trip. Libby participated in discussions in the Vice President’s office concerning how to respond to Pincus;
• on or about June 12, 2003, Libby was advised by the Vice President of the United States that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA in the Counterproliferation Division. Libby understood that the Vice President had learned this information from the CIA;
• on or about June 14, 2003, Libby met with a CIA briefer and expressed displeasure that CIA officials were making comments to reporters critical of the Vice President’s office, and discussed with the briefer, among other things, "Joe Wilson" and his wife "Valerie Wilson," in the context of Wilson’s trip to Niger;
• shortly after publication on or about June 19, 2003, of an article in The New Republic magazine online entitled "The First Casualty: The Selling of the Iraq War," Libbyspoke by telephone with his then Principal Deputy and discussed the article. That official asked Libby whether information about Wilson’s trip could be shared with the press to rebut the allegations that the Vice President had sent Wilson. Libby responded that there would be complications at the CIA in disclosing that information publicly, and that he could not discuss the matter on a non-secure telephone line; and
• on or about June 23, 2003, Libby met with Judith Miller of The New York Times. Libby was critical of the CIA and disparaged what he termed "selective leaking" by the CIA concerning intelligence matters. In discussing the CIA’s handling of Wilson’s trip to Niger, Libby informed Miller Wilson’s wife might work at a bureau of the CIA. On July 6, 2003, The New York Times published an opinion article by Joseph Wilson entitled "What I Didn’t Find in Africa." On the same day, the Washington Post published an article about Wilson’s 2002 trip to Niger, which was based partially on an interview of Wilson, and he was a guest on the television program "Meet the Press." In the article he wrote, as well as in the print and broadcast interviews of him, Wilson asserted, among other things, that he had taken a trip to Niger at the request of the CIA in February 2002 to investigate allegations that Iraq has sought or obtained uranium yellowcake from Niger, and that he doubted Iraq had obtained uranium from Niger recently, for a 6 number of reasons. Wilson said that he believed, based on his understanding of government procedures, that the Vice President’s office was advised of the results of his trip. Following Wilson’s July 6, 2003 statements, according to the indictment, Libby engaged in the following actions: • on or about July 7, 2003, Libby had lunch with the then White House Press Secretary and advised that individual that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA, noting that such information was not widely known; • on or about the morning of July 8, 2003, Libby met with Miller of The New York Times. When the conversation turned to the subject of Joseph Wilson, Libby asked that the information he provided on the topic of Wilson be attributed to a "former Hill staffer" ratherthan to a "senior administration official," as had been the understanding regarding other information that Libby provided to Miller during this meeting. Libby then discussed with Miller Wilson’s trip and criticized the CIA reporting concerning Wilson’s trip. During this discussion, Libby advised Miller of his belief that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA; also on or about July 8, 2003, Libby met with the Counsel to the Vice President in an anteroom outside the Vice President’s office. During their brief conversation, Libby asked the individual what paperwork there would be at the CIA if an employee’s spouse undertook an overseas trip; no earlier than June 2003 but on or before July 8, 2003, the Assistant to the Vice President for Public Affairs learned from another government official that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA and advised Libby of this information;
• on or about July 10, 2003, Libby spoke to NBC’s Russert to complain about press coverage of Libby by an MSNBC reporter. Libby did not discuss Wilson’s wife with Russert;
• on or about July 10 or July 11, 2003, Libby spoke to a senior White House official ("Official A")who advised Libbyof a conversation Official A had earlier that week with columnist Robert Novak in which Wilson’s wife was discussed as a CIA employee involved in Wilson’s trip. Libby was advised by Official A that Novak would be writing a story about Wilson’s wife;
• on or about July 12, 2003, Libby flew with the Vice President and others to and from Norfolk, Va., on Air Force Two. On his return trip, Libby discussed with other officials aboard the plane what Libby should say in response to certain pending media inquiries, including questions from Time’s Cooper; 7
• on or about July 12, 2003, in the afternoon, Libby spoke by telephone to Cooper, who asked whether Libby had heard that Wilson’s wife was involved in sending Wilson on the trip to Niger. Libby confirmed to Cooper, without elaboration or qualification, that he had heard this information too; and
• on or about July 12, 2003, in the late afternoon, Libby spoke by telephone with Miller and discussed Wilson’s wife, and that she worked at the CIA. The false statement charge in Count Two of the indictment alleges that Libby lied to FBI agents on October14 and November 26, 2003, regarding the conversation with Russert on July 10, 2003. Count Three charges Libby with making false statements to FBI agents during the same FBI interviews in October and November 2003 relating to his July 12, 2003 conversation with Cooper.
The perjury charge in Count Four alleges that Libby lied while testifying under oath before the grand jury on March 5, 2004, about his conversation with Russert on July 10, 2003, because, in fact, Russert did not ask Libby if Libby knew that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, nor did Russert tell Libby that all the reporters knew it, and at the time of their conversation, Libby was well aware that Wilson’s wife worked at the CIA. Count Five charges Libby with perjury before the grand juryfor allegedlylying when he said that he told reporters that he was telling them what other reporters were saying – first, on March 5, 2004, about his conversation with Cooper on or about July 12, 2003, and second, on March 24, 2004, regarding conversations with reporters. In fact, Libby well knew that he did not advise Cooper or other reporters that he had heard other reporters were saying that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, nor did Libby advise Cooper or other reporters that he did not know whether this assertion was true. If convicted, the crimes charged in the indictment carry the following maximum penalties on each count: obstruction of justice – 10 years in prison, and making false statements and perjury –5 years in prison, and each count carries a maximum fine of $250,000, making the maximum penalty for 8 conviction on all counts 30 years in prison and a $1.25 million fine. Note, however, that the Court would determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed. The public is reminded that an indictment contains only charges and is not evidence of guilt. The defendant is presumed innocent and is entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Sunday, October 23, 2005

The SCAPEGOAT AND LAMB FOR THE FAMILY

WILL BUSH BE THE SACRIFICIAL LAMB TO COVERUP FOR THOSE WHO WERE TO BLAME FOR ALL THIS MESS!

Who is responsible for these acts within our gov
erment? President George Bush - with hidden deep set wheels who are involved in a huge part of the decision making within the Whitehouse, the ones we can not see who are the power makers and creators of the policy for which President Bush stands for.....

Vice President Dick Cheney, a powerful Corporate Man who has ties to many businesses which receive massive business contacts, all which can be under the issue of Conflct of Interest because of use of a Politically Office as a means to direct business to already established companies where you can gain financially. Such has Haliburton, Lilly, Chevron, Enron and many others all tied to the Vice President, President, Secretary of Defense and others. Can this be the cause of the issue of the Nightmare on Capital Hill?


Secretary of Defense Condoleez Rice, who speaks over 6 foreign languages, knows and is involved in Russian Policies, was selected by Former President George Bush Sr., to teach foreign relations to President Bush Jr.. She is on the board of many of the large Corporate Giants who are involved in controlling world oil reserves, military equipment and cleanup efforts for the areas of New Orleans and other weather disaster areas.

She too has her involvement in this matter of corruption, Whitehouse leaks, and the lack of investigation of those who have turn this nation into a
mess of corruption and conspiracy against the American Public.

How about the Press Secretary to the White House, Karl Rove, who was in it from the beginning a man, who is a sort of Willam Randloph Hearst, a man who can spin the news in the direction which very important in the game of World control and influencing the masses. What of his involvement in this game that has brought the United States to its knees.

The issue was a statement made my Valerie Plames husband the former Ambassador of Itaqi made about the issue of weapons in Iraqi and President's Bush movement towards a war, without UN approval. After the comment then there was a leak by e-mail to those in the press, it was alledged this leak involved Robert Novak a reporter from Chicago and Judith Miller.

Miller goes to jail while the others are still untouched why? There is the question of aids being tied into Vice President Dick Cheney but again there is nothing, no arrest nothing, because in todays politicans all go without arrest because they know the public will and can do anything because they control all.

The History of the Valerie Plame Case can be located here Click this link for more information on why this indictment is very important.

The Court Files and tinelines click here

HIDDEN TIES TO THE SAUD'S READ ON AND CLICK HERE FOR THE FULL STORY


Mahfouz, the Saudi banker and part-owner of BCCI - later a key suspect in the 911 plot - Adnan, and Bush were tight? W. had been bailed out three times when his business ventures
went under. In 1988, the year his father won the presidency, a gaggle of Saudis bought into Harken Oil. Later the same year, Harken drilled for oil in the Persian Gulf, the company's first offshore contract. Two of the investors in Harken were Mahfouz and Osama's brother, Salem bin Laden.3

But reporters continued to be shocked by the continuous stream of "revelations." "In politics, truth is often stranger than fiction," wrote Martin Rivers at the Center for Research on Globalization. "Sheikh Mahfouz's sister is actually one of four wives of Osama bin Laden, making the two men brothers-in-law, a fact that former CIA Director James Woolsey revealed in 1998 Senate testimony. Thus, Osama bin Laden is sleeping with

the sister of Bush's [and Khashoggi's] business partner. Really."

The UK High Court has awarded Saudi businessman Sheikh Khaled Bin Mahfouz £10,000 damages in a defamation case filed against French author Jean-Charles Brisard and his two JCB Consulting companies. The defendants were also ordered to pay interim costs of £30,000.

In a verdict made public on July 20 following a court order on July 1, a judge found that Brisard and his two companies had made defamatory and false statements about Bin Mahfouz. Under the terms of the UK Defamation Act 1996, the court awarded £10,000 damages to be paid to Sheikh Bin Mahfouz by the defendants, declared the allegations made by the defendants to be false, and also ordered them to pay interim costs of £30,000.

Brisard and his JCB Consulting companies had alleged that a) Bin Mahfouz was one of the main individual Saudi sponsors of Al-Qaeda, b) Bin Mahfouz knowingly supported and assisted in terrorism, as a banker, by playing a leading role in the provision of financial support to Al-Qaeda and as chairman of National Commercial Bank by diverting or being responsible for the diversion of millions of dollars to terrorist organizations, and c) Bin Mahfouz is the brother-in-law of Osama Bin Laden.

Saudi Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz
Bush Financier & Osama Bin Laden’s Brother In Law

Nine hundred families of September 11 victims recently filed a trillion-dollar lawsuit against members of the royal Saudi family, businessmen worth a combined $5 billion, and banks and charities. The lawsuit accuses them of financing Osama bin Laden, Al-Qaeda, and the Tali

ban government. And one of the defendants - Saudi Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz -- will likely draw increasing attention in coming months due to his past business relationships with President George W. Bush - the sweetheart deals he made during the elder Bush's presidency.

According to a Saudi government audit acquired by U.S. intelligence officials, five of Saudi Arabia’s wealthiest businessmen, including National Commercial Bank (NCB) founder and chairman Khalid bin Mahfouz, transferred personal funds along with $3 million diverted from a Saudi pension fund, to New York and London banks with accounts linked to terrorism. (USA Today, 10-28-99)

The money transfers were discovered in April, 1999 after the royal family ordered an audit of both NCB and Sheikh Mahfouz.

The plot thickens when we find Mahfouz is also linked by marriage to terrorist Osama bin Laden, as Mahfouz’s sister is married to the Al Qaeda leader, according to not only former CIA Director James Woolsey in 1998 Senate testimony, but also Je

an-Charles Brisard, lead 9/11 lawsuit attorney Ronald Motley's researcher, and author of the book, The Forbidden Truth.


9/11 attorney Ronald Motley – Photo PBS

Motley’s 9/11 lawsuit alleges that Saudi money has “for years been funneled to encourage radical anti-Americanism as well as to fund the Al Qaeda terrorists,“ a fact not taken lightly by 9/11 family members fighting back tears at the podium dur

ing Motley’s recent press conference.

The alledge banking ties: UBS, Citibank, Noriba Bank, and others in the US and abroad.

HSBC, Citibank and UBS - a major sponsor of the IIFF under the guise of its Noriba
Islamic banking division – have all made serious moves into Islamic banking , the Noriba Bank in Bahrain seems to have the concept of the No Riba Program I developed within Royal Financial Group Inc., in Palos Hills Illinois.


Some of those involved in the bank are also faces I can recall seeing within and around the office of Bayatana Funding. I filed a 52 million dollar lawsuit about the stolen concept which was patented here, and but again theft of service is again a part of the concept of high crimes and criminal a
ctivities used to fund acts of terrorism.

THE COUNCIL OF ELDERS

There is another untold force in Washington read more here and click to read the full story: CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL STORY


There is in Washington a group of men who oversee matters which can be severely damaging to either the Democratic or Republican party. It is thought by these men that if certain irregularities are divulged it may critically injure the two party system and allow a third party to become a major political force. This would cripple the the Democratic/Republican monopoly and end the Washington status quo for which they are the supreme guardians. These men are sometimes called elder statesmen and work with United States media barons as well White House and Congressional politicos to see that any investigations are contained on a particularly sensitive issue. These men have the capability of controlling media stories and Federal investigations that they deem threatening to the hegemony of the two party system and the status quo. Each potential scandal is treated case by case by the elders. The men within this council by-and-large hide deeply within the recesses of lawyer/lobbyist or special interest consulting firms of Washington. There medium of exchange is IOUs with the play-along-get-along philosophy. There word is considered gospel. Democrat Clark Clifford was one of these men before he was disgraced for becoming an active conspirator in the BCCI scam he was to hush. Republican Henry Kissinger was caught in the BNL scam and is currently hushing his role in the Orlando Letier/Allende assassinations. The Republican Bush and Democratic Bentsen families have hushed their deep involvement in the Savings and Loan scandal. Who in Washington allowed the "forgiveness of the S&L loans"? Why does the established United States media refrain from investigating the S&L "forgiveness"? We now are being told of the recently exposed Clinton/Cuomo HUD (Housing and Urban Development) scam whose conspirators seemed to have copied the S&L scam format. No one ever goes to jail and the conspirators get to keep the money, for they control the investigation. The New York Times reports: "Is it a pattern? Who is accountable? How high up the chain of command should responsibility be placed? A basic question, always, is: How much personal knowledge did the people at the top have of the abuses in the middle or at the bottom? --- Other situations are less fuzzy. --- the crime was anonymous --- no human was accountable.

The Issue of New Orleans andthe hidden Dangers - Racism Today Many State and its being found in this Adminstration. Click here on the report of the Bio Danger Down South from the Storm.


The Acts of Impeachment

Rule 609. Impeachment by Evidence of Conviction of Crime.

(a) General Rule. For the purpose of attacking the credibility of any witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime, whether by verdict or by plea of guilty or nolo contendere, shall be admitted if it involved dishonesty or false statement.

(b) Time Limit. Evidence of a conviction under this rule is not admissible if a period of more than ten years has elapsed since the date of the conviction or of the release of the witness from the confinement imposed for that conviction, whichever is the later date, unless the court determines, in the interests of justice, that the probative value of the conviction substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect. However, evidence of a conviction more than ten years old as calculated herein is not admissible unless the proponent gives to the adverse party sufficient advance written notice of intent to use such evidence to provide the adverse party with a fair opportunity to contest the use of such evidence.

(c) Effect of Pardon or Other Equivalent Procedure or Successful Completion of Rehabilitation Program. Evidence of a conviction is not admissible under this rule if the conviction has been the subject of one of the following:

(1) a pardon or other equivalent procedure based on a specific finding of innocence; or

(2) a pardon or other equivalent procedure based on a specific finding of rehabilitation of the person convicted, and that person has not been convicted of any subsequent crime.

(d) Juvenile Adjudications. In a criminal case only, evidence of the adjudication of delinquency for an offense under the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S.A. § § 6301 et seq., may be used to impeach the credibility of a witness if conviction of the offense would be admissible to attack the credibility of an adult.

(e) Pendency of Appeal. The pendency of an appeal therefrom does not render evidence of a conviction inadmissible. Evidence of the pendency of an appeal is admissible.

Comment

Pa.R.E. 609(a) differs from F.R.E. 609(a). Pa.R.E. 609(a), subject to the time limitations in Pa.R.E. 609(b), is similar to F.R.E. 609(a)(2) because it permits impeachment of any witness by evidence of conviction of a crime involving dishonesty or false statement, regardless of what the punishment for that crime may be. However, Pa.R.E. 609(a) does not permit use of evidence of conviction of a crime punishable by death or imprisonment for more than one year, which is allowed under F.R.E. 609(a)(1), subject to certain balancing tests. This limitation on the type of crime evidence admissible is consistent with prior Pennsylvania case law. See Commonwealth v. Randall, 515 Pa. 410, 528 A.2d 1326 (1987); Commonwealth v. Bighum, 452 Pa. 554, 307 A.2d 255 (1973). Moreover, Pa.R.E. 609(a), unlike F.R.E. 609(a)(2), specifically provides that a conviction based upon a plea of nolo contendere may be used to impeach; this, too, is consistent with prior Pennsylvania case law. See Commonwealth v. Snyder, 408 Pa. 253, 182 A.2d 495 (1962).

As a general rule, evidence of a jury verdict of guilty or a plea of guilty or nolo contendere may not be used to impeach before the court has pronounced sentence. See Commonwealth v. Zapata, 455 Pa. 205, 314 A.2d 299 (1974). In addition, evidence of admission to an Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition program under Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 310-320 may not be used to impeach credibility. See Commonwealth v. Krall, 290 Pa. Super. 1, 434 A.2d 99 (1981).

Where the target of impeachment is the accused in a criminal case, 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5918 again comes into play. See Comment to Pa.Rs.E. 607, 608 pointing out that § 5918’s prohibition against questioning defendant who takes stand about conviction of any offense other than the one for which he is on trial applies only to cross-examination. Hence, evidence of conviction of a crime may be introduced in rebuttal after the defendant has testified. See Commonwealth v. Bighum, 452 Pa. 554, 307 A.2d 255 (1973).

Pa.R.E. 609(b) differs slightly from F.R.E. 609(b) in that the phrase ‘‘supported by specific facts and circumstances,’’ used in the latter with respect to the balancing of probative value and prejudicial effect, has been eliminated. Pa.R.E. 609(b) basically tracks what was said in Commonwealth v. Randall, 515 Pa. 410, 528 A.2d 1326 (1987). Where the date of conviction or last date of confinement is within ten years of the trial, evidence of the conviction of a crimen falsi is per se admissible. If more than ten years have elapsed, the evidence may be used only after written notice and the trial judge’s determination that its probative value substantially outweighs its prejudicial effect. The relevant factors for making this determination are set forth in Binhum, supra, and Commonwealth v. Roots, 482 Pa. 33, 393 A.2d 364 (1978). For the computation of the ten-year period, where there has been a reincarceration because of a parole violation, see Commonwealth v. Jackson, 526 Pa. 294, 585 A.2d 1061 (1991).

Pa.R.E. 609(c) is similar to F.R.E. 609(c). There are no Pennsylvania cases dealing squarely with the matters covered by section (c). Where a pardon is based upon a finding that a defendant was in fact innocent, the conviction is a nullity and has no probative value; accordingly, there is no basis to permit its use. A pardon based upon a finding of rehabilitation is an indication that the character flaw which gave rise to the inference of untruthfulness has been overcome and so should no longer be taken into account. A subsequent conviction of any crime, whether or not it involves dishonesty or false statement, casts substantial doubt on the finding of rehabilitation and justifies use of the evidence. In the case of both types of pardon, the instrument embodying the pardon must set forth the finding of innocence or rehabilitation. A pardon granted to restore civil rights or to reward good behavior does not make evidence of the conviction inadmissible under Pa.R.E. 609(c), but is admissible in rebuttal if the conviction is used to impeach. Commonwealth v. Quaranta, 295 Pa. 264, 145 A.2d 89 (1926).

Pa.R.E. 609(d) differs from F.R.E. 609(d). Under the latter, evidence of juvenile adjudications is generally inadmissible to impeach credibility, except in criminal cases against a witness other than the accused where the court finds that the evidence is necessary for a fair determination of guilt or innocence. Pa.R.E. 609(d), to be consistent with 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6354(b)(4) permits a broader use; a juvenile adjudication of an offense may be used to impeach in a criminal case if conviction of the offense would be admissible if committed by an adult. Juvenile adjudications may also be admissible for other purposes. See 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 6354(b)(1), (2), and (3).

Moreover, under the confrontation clause of the United States Constitution, the accused in a criminal case has the right to use the juvenile record of a witness to show the witness’ possible bias, regardless of the type of offense involved. See Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 309 (1974); Commonwealth v. Simmons, 521 Pa. 218, 555 A.2d 860 (1989).

Pa.R.E. 609(e) is identical to F.R.E. 609(e). There is no Pennsylvania law on this issue. According to the Advisory Committee Notes to F.R.E. 609(e), a witness may be impeached by evidence of a prior conviction regardless of a pending appeal because of the ‘‘presumption of correctness that ought to attend judicial proceedings.’’ This is the predominant view. 1 McCormick, Evidence, § 42 (4th ed. 1992).


HERE IS A FILED TREASON LAWSUIT READ THIS ONE

THE ACTS OF TREASON.
[Official Lawsuit #04-384C USCAFC Please read and forward to the friend.]
This Appendix is the part of Extraordinary Writ of Mandamus addressed to
the Highest Authority, the Highest Court - the Appeal Court for the
Federal Circuit and to American Nation to stop the Acts of Treason
committed by Federal Judge Mary Ellen Coster Williams.
-------
The Bush’s Administrations, which are the members of the band of Super Rich Owners of American Oil Corporations and Military Industrial Complex and Criminal Group of American Government Officials [Secret Organization of Traitors in America (SOTA)] declared War of annihilation against Population of the United States of America.

The Bush’s Administrations, Federal Judges and the others Members of SOTA facilitated the completely destruction of the Economy, Law and Order in the Country, physically castrated American working Male Population, who lost their jobs and became unable to provide any more for their Families, and mentally annihilated People, destroyed Family Structures and left Millions Men, Women and Families in desperation and poverty and Millions of Children Fatherless.

This War on annihilation of American Nation has a name - Treason.“Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” Article III, Section 8, The Constitution of the United States.American Citizens cannot rely on the Court System any more.It does not matter, if You are White, Black, Yellow or Green color, Protestant, Catholic, Jew, Muslim, Seven Day Adventist or Buddhist, if
you are not a member of the Criminal Group of the Extremely Rich Thieves
protected by the Federal Judges, You are robbed just in the same way -
no discrimination.

The Democracy in America was the envy of the World. No more we are able to live in the Law-abiding Society, elect Our Government, The President, The Governors, The Senator, and The Congressmen to run our Country according to the Constitution and Laws of the United States.There are no Constitution or Laws enforced any more by the Dictatorial Regime of the Government Officials, who illegally and criminally obtained positions in our Government, as U.S. President, and illegal criminals installed by him, as the Heads of the Department of Justice,
Labor, Treasury, Health and Human Services etc…, Judges and Clerks of Federal Courts, Heads of Securities and Exchange Commission and in the Rest of American Institutions, which was originally created for one purpose and only to oversee that American People Constitutional Rights are enforced.

The United States Justice System does not exist any more. The members of SOTA Traitors, the Federal Judges are forcing the American People to spend countless years in Courts in hope that Plaintiffs will become sick, die or unable to continue their Lawsuits against members of SOTA. If by some chance, some honest Judge left make Judgment for the Common People, such Judgment will never be enforced by the Department of Justice, which is completely under control of members of SOTA.What is for the American People left to do?The Declaration of Independence. (July 4, 1776.) is demanding, “that thenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.”

According to “The Declaration of Independence”, it is Holy duty and
Obligation of every American Patriots and American War Veterans to
organize Militia and arm themselves to abolish such Government like it
was done in 1776.

It is our Constitutional right to organize “A well regulated Militia (National Guards), being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Amendment II, The Constitution of the United States.Dictators never gave their Power back to the People voluntary, it have to be taken from them by force.