Dear Jack;
Instead of milking Obama's speech for whatever controversy CNN thinks it can wring out of it why not run the entirety of Barack Obama's speech on Racism? This is one of of the most eloquent statesmen since Lincoln and a historically significant address to the American people. CNN is pathetic for its bottom feeding practices and all its commentators, save yourself, are disgusting examples of yellow journalism.

Give 'em hell, Jack.

Tom Lincoln

CREW,

Thank you for your blog. We've heard plenty of evidence warranting the President and Vice President getting prosecuted. Some think that Congress -- because it refuses to impeach -- inaction is the final word.

Small problem: Impeachment isn't the only option; rather, impeachment is assumed to be an option, as is prosecutions. But as long as impeachment is on the table, prosecutions of a sitting President was considered secondary.
However, today's reality: Congress has not timely acted as required; contrary ot the people saying prosecution should not be used, impeachment isn't being used.

I ask the readers to consider the comment-thread at the following blog [the comments after the blog content]:
http://indictdickcheney.blogspot.com/2007/05/some-answers-why-did-james-comey-only.html

The issue is the prosecution -- outside impeachment -- of a sitting President and Vice President. Given today's revelations of this abuse of power by the Vice President and evidence destruction, I ask the CREW team and public to contact prosecutors in the States to prosecute the President and Vice President outside the impeachment process. The link goes in to more details, even Ashcroft discussed the option when he was a Senator.

If the Congress is going to take impeachment toff the table, then they by default admit that prosecution must remain on the table. I ask that the CREW legal team organize the evidence you have, consolidated it in the context of an indictment, and seek the brave souls in the States at the Attorney General level who are willing to do what this Congress refuses to do: Enforce the law against domestic enemies.

Regardless the position of the Senate on the President's crimes -- related to the removal decision -- our system of government only works when there is a credible threat of prosecution. We used to believe that enforcement of the law was through the impeachment. However, scholars like Jonathan Turley at Georgetown have discussed the issue. Indeed, there are different views on whether prosecuting a sitting President will succeed.

I argue, in light of Congress' decision not to enforce the law; and the House, in effect, giving the Senate an illegal silent-vote on whether to impeach -- because the Senate does not have "enough" votes to remove -- then the only option the public has is to rely on the Prosecution option.

I ask that the CREW legal team organize its information; and present it publicly not as an appeal to Congress to act; but as a peer in the legal community to other legal professionals as the state level: Remind your peers in the legal community at the State AG office that their loyalty is not to Congressional inaction or party politics, but to something fundamental: Defending this Constitution from domestic enemies, whether they are in the criminal sector, white collar crime, or in the White House.

America citizens are disgusted with the abuse of power, the illegal war, and Congress has not provided the leadership. Indeed, they have blocked efforts by the states to use legislative tools to enforce the Constitution by blocking state proclamations for impeachment. Arguably this effort by the GOP and DNC to thwart state proclamation for impeachment could be entered as evidence of not fully complying with the oath of office, 5 USC 3331.

I ask that CREW challenge the legal community to make a choice: Between the Constitution or this President. If the American legal community is willing to choose the Constitution, then I ask that CREW work with those lawyers who will issue indictments and prosecute this President and Vice President outside the impeachment process. The message to Members of Congress is clear: You were given a fair chance to assert your oath; you refused to enforce the Constitution through impeachment; you have blocked the states from passing proclamations calling for impeachment. All reasonable efforts have been exhausted to get Congress to use its power to enforced the Constitution through impeachment.

The way forward is to start a parallel track, outside Congress, in tandem with impeachment, that expressly points the legal community in the eye: "You must choose now between this President's illegal rebellion and the rule of law in the Constitution." Members of Congress and members of the State Bars who refuse to support and defend this Constitution through prosecutions need to be reminded that this power of prosecution can be enforced through state petitions calling for grand juries. Nothing the legislatures can do will stop this.

We the People once relied on the legal community to do its job to defend this document. It is clear in the wake of the DOJ Staff counsel betrayal of their oath, lies about the e-mails in re US Attorney firings, and the illegal warfare and abuse of prisoners on top of FISA violations that the American legal community will not effectively police its own. It is 2007, and this abuse of power has gone on too long.

We the People voted for change. The Congress and State legislatures have not delivered. The second prong outside impeachment to enforce this Constitution is through the prosecution process. Members of Congress who attempt to block these prosecutions, as they have shown they will do with the US Attorney litigation and State proclamations, need to be reminded: At the core of the dispute with this President and Vice President are not transitory issue of civil rights, but something more serious: War crimes.

Arguably, Members of Congress who attempt to block prosecution of this President and Vice President could be similarly charged with obstruction of justice. The DOJ and EOP have been implicated in serious efforts to breach Geneva; the GOP and DNC have been implicated in efforts to not enforce the Supreme Law. I ask CREW to take a fresh look at the legal options outside impeachment, contact Jonathan Turley at Georgetown, review his article, and conduct a survey of the legal community to find out who is with you in defending this Constitution through prosecutions. I ask that the results of that survey be published so that We the People can learn more about what is or is not working in the legal community; and whether they are or are not serious about defending this Constitution. IT does not appear they are.

Going forward, regardless what happens with the prosecution or impeachment, I ask that Crew examine the structural changes required in the Constitution to prevent this abuse from happening again. How this untimely is resolved remains to be seen. The time for We the People to "wait around" for the next election to "possibly" get someone in Congress to respond is a non-starter. WE the People voted for change; time for the legal community to change: Prosecute this President and Vice President outside Congress and the impeachment process. Those who refuse or attempt to block this effort to enforce the Supreme Law may be subsequently adjudicated with war crimes.

Choose.

Once Cheney destroys one set of records, he is, by default, creating a separate repository for all non-destroyed documents. This is not in compliance with the statue.

I would like the DOJ OLC to provide all memoranda to the Vice President and his counsel on this issue; and release a copy of that memoranda to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. This data retention problem needs to be reviewed in the context of the US Attorney e-mails; RNC e-mail accounts; and the funds going from the RNC to the Libby-lawsuit-fund website/and the RNC hosts.

I'd like for Cheney to produce all records related to the apparent decision to block the archivist from having any input; and find out what attempt if any the archivist has made to secure these documents outside the VP Control: "the Archivist may, when the Archivist determines that it is in the public interest, enter into an agreement for the deposit of Vice-Presidential records in a non-Federal archival depository."

A. What documents sent through the RNC e-mails has Cheney sent directing the Archivist to do or not do anything?
In effect, what Cheney is doing -- by destroying things -- is creating a separate archive, which is expressly illegal: "Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to authorize the establishment of separate archival depositories for such Vice-Presidential records.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode44/usc_sec_44_00002207----000-.html

B. Where are these records being housed, and why is Cheney creating a "separate" depository in violation of 44 USC 2207?

C. Does Cheney comprehend that _his_ electronic data sent through the RNC servers, and not archived, amounts to a separate archive expressly _prohibited_ by 44 USC 2207?

Good job, Ms. Sloan! I hope you keep the pressure for the answers to who is going over to Cheney's home, why, and when. It is certainly for a personal agenda. I will put the letter and your article on my blog. Thank you.

SP Biloxi
Justice League

Due praise to Jack Cafferty for asking this question. The answer, one suspects, is that Cheney has a great deal to hide.

The "House GOP fear fallout" AP story missed the target:
it is not corruption in the House that will hurt the worst, it is the crime and corruption found in the administration. Remember: Jack Abramoff was a White House regular and now he is singing sweetly to the DOJ investigators. Dick Cheney's wriggles will not save him.