April 6, 1998



Mr. Clinton's attorney filed a motion to dismiss the Paula Jones sexual harassment case against President Clinton.

                  In order to dismiss this case the more appropriate term is to render a summary judgment that will or will not dismiss the case. Both parties had to give the judge an account of their version of the events.

                   Paula Jones' party gave 700 plus page file to the judge and the lawyer for the President, Mr. Bennett gave his version of why the case should be dismissed. At this time the President's lawyer was heavily criticized because the Paula Jones case became public in a civil trial both parties have to make their intentions public and Paula Jones' case being very weak, Paula Jones' lawyer had to dig up and bring in new witnesses who made false claims, smear the President as much as they could and their is nobody that could say anything to the contrary. As the grand jury was proceeding on a separate track the next step was to wait for the judgment itself by the judge, Mrs. White.

                   It is interesting to understand that there was tremendous pressure on the judge to render a political judgment. It was obvious that Kenneth Starr and Paula Jones were working hand in hand and wanted to have the President by the throat, smearing him with so many allegations that it was almost impossible for a judge to render a non-political judgment based solely on the facts and the law. Then the judgment came as fast as a clap of thunder, the judge in her summary judgment dismissed fully and entirely Paula Jones' case against the President based on the extreme weakness of the case. The case had no merit.

                  Judgments like that have to be remembered when democracy has become tabloid trash version of democracy, and sometimes fortunately somebody stands up and says; I'm going by the law of this country, I'm a judge, and even if President Clinton is the leader of the democratic party very often in opposition with my party, the Republican party but we are a democracy, we're not a tribe with gurus and witch hunters as it was in the McCarthy era. So, here's my judgment: the surprise was that this judge had enough guts to stick by the law and not compromise with the political pressure that was put on her.

                   So, yes it is a very important victory for democracy, as it is written in the American Constitution. Rumors, gossip are strong enemies of democracy.

BACK TO INDEX            



February 27, 1998


:                    One of President Clinton's aides, Sidney Blumenthal was subpoenaed by Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel to be interrogated by Kenneth Starr's grand jury about his alleged indiscretions with the press. Starr is trying to convict him on obstruction of justice.


This last action from Kenneth Star shows different things;

1. First and foremost it shows that incredible but true Kenneth Starr does not understand the first amendment which is about freedom of speech and therefore freedom of the press. This from a man who was at one time on a very short list to be nominated as one of the judges of the Supreme Court. For a democracy this is as bad as it can get.

2. Kenneth Starr is becoming more and more desperate, therefore, more and more dangerous and straying further and further from the true meaning of democracy because he is using another inappropriate weapon trying to prove an alleged sex affair between the President of the United States and intern, Monica Lewinsky.

                   By the way we have to remark that this subject is a very private domain for both families. Only if Star can prove the alleged affair he will be able to make a case for more indictments such as perjury or obstruction of justice.

                  What we say is that democracy in essence is the government of the people, by the people. Polls show that the people of the United States oppose in a very large majority
Kenneth Starr's action. This investigation is violating the inner circle of families, (Monica Lewinsky' mother) something they wouldn't like to happen to them.

They also feel that Kenneth Starr is using this inappropriate weapon, such as using an atomic bomb to kill a fly.


a. Question

Are Kenneth Starr's actions endorsed by the People of the United States thus following the essential rule of democracy?



b. Question

Are Kenneth Starr's actions appropriate and worthy of modern democracy?


No, he is following the footsteps of the infamous McCarthy.

c. Question

Did Kenneth Starr become an anti-democratic persona?


Yes, because he can push to overthrow the President and subpoenaed before his grand jury the entire nation of the United States without any serious link to the main subject. All this without any serious balancing power, he is a desperate and dangerous man


Therefore, there are all the elements for Kenneth Starr to become a dictator a shocking thing in a democracy. If he succeed to overthrow the president of the U S A , he will achieve a Coup, a non democratic reversal of power.







   Again from the point of view of democracy the last of Kenneth Starr's actions are very disturbing.

               To say the least, and everybody agrees that it should be reformed, the Grand Jury system with its essentially powerful Independent Counsel is an un-democratic tool with its lack of balance and its real possibility for abusing the people targeted by the inquiry.

                 What is important in Kenneth Starr's actions is that he takes an already undemocratic and abusive system and pushes it even more into a non-democratic and abusive way. The man has completely lost the sight that is a citizen of one of the most democratic country. Democracy that was built by blood and sacrifice by illustrious men.

                  For example, the very simple fact that he has asked the Supreme Court to by-pass a Court of Appeal which is an essential right for a citizen to have a second chance at explaining his point of view in the litigation process and this, when there is absolutely no emergency (as he argued for) to speed up the process. By trying hard to by-pass one of the essential elements of the judiciary system he clearly shows that he is strongly for a tyranny where the citizen has not been given a fair chance to explain his case. The best example of this kind of behavior in making a mockery of the legal system was shown by the leaders of communist countries who were all absolute dictators.


We can very safely say that with no emergency to do so, Kenneth Starr's actions to by-pass the democratic system that protects the citizens of the United States, including the president, are a true danger for democracy. It is a disgrace, imposed on all American people and a disgusting vision of the world.



September 30, 1998



                   What is the opinion of the American people about their President, Bill Clinton's problem? What do they think?

                  In a democracy the first concern of the House of Representatives and the Senate is to try absolutely to understand, seek and learn what are the feelings and thoughts of the American citizens. You could think it is a difficult process but it's actually a very easy process, it is called polls.

                What are the polls or what is a poll? We have to define that very quickly.

       Well, as now everybody knows, the poll is the reflection of the opinion and feelings of the American citizen. Companies specialized in this research call all over the country, a certain number of people, ranging from 1000 to 10,000 and ask them a few questions about their opinion, the people answer, it is a sample of the opinion of the American people. This system has been in place for a long time already and it is well organized, relatively independent and the American citizens are chosen at random.

                If you're a cautious congressman, you might decide to wait until three or four polls on the same subject are published because this process will involve different companies doing this poll, different samples of American citizens, then you are certain that you have a good picture of the ideas and feelings of the American citizens.

So, what did or do the polls tell us on the subject of the American President, Bill Clinton ? They reflect the opinions of the American people, the American citizen, what is the opinion of the American citizen?

                    It is very simple, they, in a large majority around 66 to 68%, which is a very large majority in a democracy, on a subject that has been shown in great detail, with some unpleasant details, they are truly, absolutely, in favor of President Clinton. They like President Clinton, they like the job he is doing, they admire him and they don't want him to be impeached and polls show too that they disapprove of the Republican Party ambushing the President. So that is the voice of America.

                  Their representatives, the people who are suppose to serve them are sneering at polls and insulting the common sense and intelligence of American people. They dismissed the poll, they simply don't want to face the truth. The truth is, the American people want to keep Bill Clinton as a president because they admire the job he is doing. So, in Congress, Bill Clinton's opponent, the Republican Party is rising to a level of bad faith that is not achieved often in this country, the last sample was the MacCarthy era. They simply deny, sneer at, and are full of contempt for the American peoples desires, and wishes, feelings and ideas, even though they have been elected to serve and represent the American people.

                   It is an enormous distortion of democracy. The politicians are betraying the spirit of their office, which is to serve the American people, and the American people with their common sense and intelligence understand that very well.




   September 28, 1998



                   What is the opinion of the other nations and other people about the possibility of the President of the United States being impeached?, we are September, the 28th, 1998.

                 There is barely any week that goes by without the United States under the presidency of President, Bill Clinton helping other countries around the world or trying to put out the fire that could damage an enormous number of people. In the last four weeks, we have, and I am talking about September, 1998, seen different events which involve the United States.

                  September 28, 1998 there was a reunion in Washington, the capital of the United States, of two former fierce enemies, Chancellor Arafat, President of the State of Palestine, and the Prime Minister of Israel. Simply the fact that they can come together and talk face to face is a major achievement and the United States has been deeply involved and President Clinton has worked extremely hard to try to bring peace in this part of the region, and he has been acclaimed all over the world, except for some terrorist or extremist, I've not read a critic of President Clinton on this matter, trying to bring peace in the Middle East.

                 A few days ago, at the United States Senate, Nelson Mendella received a Congressional Medal of Honor. Nelson Mendella, who fought us all his life for bringing down Apartheid, had an extremely warm and kind word for the President of the United States, which was genuinely concerned and involved in the after Apartheid process and has struck a strong relationship with this exceptional man, Nelson Mendella, Nobel Prize for Peace.

                On the same visit a few days ago, for the speech of Nelson Mendella, at the building of the United Nations in New York, when President Clinton entered the auditorium, even though he was not the star of the meeting he received a standing ovation, which is very rare especially when such a great man as Nelson Mendella is present. All the other nations around the world knows and understands how important President Clinton's policy is, and how committed, and how a hard worker he is to bring peace around the world.

                He also tries hard to keep Iraq from developing weapons of mass destruction that could inflame an important region around Iraq, but also, that could be smuggled into the United States and kill hundreds of thousands of Americans. After two embassies in Africa were destroyed by terrorists and many people killed, he ordered a strike against the headquarters of this terrorist group, even when he was in the midst of personal attacks

     The people of these other countries, without any exception, France, Spain, England, Portugal. etc., think and report that they think the American people, the American citizens are stupid little kids. Why? When you have a leader of such successful economics endeavor and of such a magnitude force in foreign politics trying to shoot him as much as you can until you bring him down, make the people of the rest of the world think that American people are completely stupid.

          Foreign people don't know the polls, they don't read the American Polls, they only know that America is trying to impeach her president on sexual matters, private matters, and that makes them laugh, and be very sad actually too, because it is not possible to understand. Because the only vision they have is the Congress trying to impeach President Clinton with the Republican driving the war and making President Clinton look as bad as it could be. They can not differentiate between the opinion of the American citizen and the voice of Republican leaders of the Congress. So for them Americans are big spoiled kids, that are trying to destroy something that is good and they feel sorry, and they feel they are very stupid.

                  So when we hear that Republican congressmen are saying that President Clinton has lost his credibility in the world, that is a lie. The truth is that the Republican Congressmen has made the American people as a whole lost its credibility and be labeled as stupid, spoiled kids.






May 14, 1999


There are strong signs of the beginning of decadence in the government of the United States, but not yet in the American people.

The Republicans talk about patriotism, but their acts show the weakness of their patriotism.

Ten days after the beginning of the bombing of Kosovo the Republican Party was already attacking with full force, President Clinton's action.

The two prominent Republican candidates, George Bush Jr. and Elizabeth Dole, with famous names, have not shown any leadership or took any position on the Kosovo conflict. They are just sitting and watching while the Nation is at war.

Most votes in the House and in the Senate are against President Clinton, who is the Commander-in-Chief, and that only ten, twenty or thirty days after the beginning of the conflict.

Again the votes and discourses of the Republican Party are not in tune with the feeling of the American people.


It is really appalling to see the Republican majority in the Congress using their resentment in the Lewinsky scandal to set it as a standard to comment and vote on such important matters as War, genocide and the lives of the American soldiers.

In the midst of this Republican ocean of mud, the only sign of ethics and courage is Republican Senator, John McCaine, who puts the interest of his country above dirty political maneuvers.







April 14, 1999

Beside the unacceptable suffering of fellow human beings

The main and vital answer is the following:

If you give a killer a license to kill, he will kill more and more people.

If you give a rapist a license to rape, he will rape more and more people.

The past has shown that each time mass murderer's such as Hitler, Stalin, and Sadam Hussein were weakly contradicted by what is called the West, (the Free World,). The slaughter of civilians became atrocious.

Each time weakness was shown before, at the beginning, during, or after a period of tension or war, these war criminals and mass murderers always went for more crimes on a huge scale.

The pattern is exactly the same with individual criminals who share the same slaughtering instinct as the infamous leaders cited above. If society shows weakness to these individuals, murderers or rapists they will continue to increase their murders and rapes.

The main reason, to act with determination is to show these mass murderers that they will be put out of their disgusting business.

The power and reach of the military action in Kosovo is to show that mass murderers like Slobodan Milosevich will not be given a license to kill in the 21st. Century.



First Topic: Colin Powell:

Who is by far the most qualified man to lead the USA in time of war and multiple crises:
Colin Powell.
He is the only Senior leader who has been a soldier in a previous war similar to the Iraqi war.
He has been a general and a chief of staff under different administrations.
He was in charge of foreign affairs when he was a Secretary of State.
He has been rejected by President Bush an intellectually challenged man which makes Colin Powell an intelligent men
President Bush's rejection is by itself a big incentive to involve Colin Powell into the highest level of decision making. because it is a stamp that says: I reject Competent and intelligent men because I cannot understand them
Remember my motto:
President Bush is a compass that point South almost all the time always showing the wrong directions .
If you want to be right it is easy, just take the opposite direction to the one President Bush has embarked on along with the country he currently governs.
President Bush has not been a mean person and has made some good decisions when his decisions are guided by his heart and not his brain for example, legalization of illegal immigrants.

Colin Powell removed himself from politic after he was humiliated out by the Bush administration.
offering to give advices to any leader including the Democrats.
The Democratic leadership have not signed him on, what a catastrophic oversight

Nancy Pelosi should form a special bond with Colin Powell.
He is 100 times more useful than Henry Kissinger and James Baker combined.
One day he can negotiate a diplomatic settlement in Palestine, the next day he can organize an attack on a rebel Shiite bastion in Iraq.
In addition he is the only one who could boost the moral of the soldiers on any given day.
Even North Korean and China respect him
This man is a legend.

Eric Lafayette
Email: ericlafayette@fordemocracy.com
Tel: 1 310 500 8771

Second Topic: Military Strategy.

Once the war in Iraq has changed from conventional warfare to Guerilla warfare and got worse with the Sectarian violence or civil war the Pentagon should have taken a page from another war manual.

What we had then during the first phase of the war was a non mobile static Army , the Iraqi Army attacked by a much more mobile Army, the US army.
What we have now is a Insurgent and sectarian Iraqi Army extremely mobile, extremely nimble attacking a semi static Army installed in fortified camp and going out on patrol advertised in advance.
We have seen a reversal of mobility
The soldiers leave on known routes, their bases are very well know, in addition Iraqi informants imbedded in the US military tips the insurgents or the armed militia on the mission and area where the action is going to take place.

The following strategy is most probably a Strategy that will be more useful for the long term that for the very short term, however the concept should be integrated right away in a new school of thoughts
Concept for a new strategy:T
Always be more mobile and unexpected than the enemy is.
It is the quintessential Napoleon strategy: movement, movement, movement.
It is also the strategy of most successful Great military commanders.

30 000 troops are not absolutely necessary, it is way too little, way too late ( If it was feasible an additional 500 000 troops is what is`necessary) to achieve military victory

Instead of being harassed, the US military should harass the insurgents and the rogue militia.
The US army should be able to inflict repeated deadly blows to any insurgents by appearing very often and repeatedly when not expected.
What kind of utter stupidity it is to advertise in advance that the Army is going to clean a neighborhood or a town ( Falujia) let all the women out, some of the men, wait almost a week the attack, then stop the attack.

What is the mission?
THE MISSION IS TO RETSORE AWE and RESPECT for the USA. To show that the USA is`not a toothless fat idiot ( which is what the rogue nations believe it is now.)
Muqtada Al Sadr must be captured or killed. There is a warrant against him.
The US must find a mission that will deliver a small but convincing victory without
the additional 30 000 troops. It could be called "operation thrust"I believe that the best case scenario is to bait the insurgents into attacking a soft target and then destroy them with missiles from outside Iraq. After the missile strike there should be a small presence of boots on the ground doing a clean up, not a heavy fighting. The missile strike must be heavy, very destructive and inspire awe and respect.
If the 30 000 troops are brought in then the US is taking the risque if they do not succeed in securing Baghdad of having added another defeat to their long list of failure in Iraq.
If operation thrust is well executed, the worse case scenario is that the other rogue nations will see at least that the USA has still plenty of teeth. If necessary this operation could be repeated twice.
In the process eliminate Muqtada Al Sadr and Change the prime minister.
It will help tremendously in any future negotiation.


Third Topic: Diplomatic Strategy:

After the US army has shown to the word that it is still capable of victory even if it is a small victory, diplomacy can begin.
Iraq is not viable as one country, its partition in three entities is inevitable that is the diplomatic strategy the US should work on.
Historically Iraq was never a country built on the coalition of the willing. Iraq unification was done by force under British rule and maintained by extreme force under Saddam rule.
Partitioning Iraq in three countries very loosely assembled under a common umbrella is the only way to go because:
Partition is happening already.
Religion in this middle east of the middle ages tend to fiercely reject other religion.
It is the only solution that offers some damage control and allows the US to withdraw its troops.

We must not forget that If President Bush had not irresponsibly declared war on Iraq we would not be trying to salvage what little we can salvage.
It will not be an easy process and the need for an exceptional diplomat will be important..
It will reinforce Iran which will have access to the oil of the Shiites.
Sunnis and Shiites will continue their war but without the US soldiers in the middle.
It is today the best the US can hope to extirpate themselves from a dreadful situation the US are sunk into.
Syria is not a country based on religion.
Syria's President must be convinced that the USA and Europe are going to make his country an economic model of prosperity for the region.

Eric Lafayette
Phone: 1 310 500 87 71

From the desk of Eric Lafayette, Los Angeles October 24th 2008

Att Barack Obama

Presidential working groups or Presidential councils

Experience added to Presidential decision making.
The Concept is explained in this rough draft for a Barack Obanma speech.

My Dear fellow Americans

We have entered difficult times and they are shaking our foundations.

Only during the Revolutionary war, the civil war and the great depression did we face problems of the magnitude we are in now.

We are fighting two wars and the worst economic crisis since the great depression.

We need change: In exceptional times exceptional measures or arrangement are needed.

I will create 3 Presidential brain trusts also called Presidential work groups ( not committee - bad word)

One about Diplomacy and defense
One about Economy and Energy
One about Healthcare and Education.

Or 5 Presidential work groups but the choice between 3 and 5 can be sorted out later.

Here is the version with 5 work groups

The first one about Economy will be comprised of
Warren Buffet, Henri Paulson, Donald Trump and other useful experienced economists and entrepreneurs

The Second one about Diplomacy and Defense will be comprised of
Madeleine Albright, Baker, Kissinger Colin Powell and others top level analyst such as David Gergen

The third one about Renewable energy and climate change will be comprised of:
Al Gore, T bone Pickens and other of the same caliber

The Fourth one about Education will be comprised
of doers and shakers and masters at funding the schools

The fifth one about health care: will be comprised of people
with innovative ideas and a desire to overhaul the whole system.

The creation of these brain-trust are not electoral gimmick they will help the President steer the American vessel through the very troubled waters we are in now

I will have access to more experience and knowledge than any President in the history of the USA.

I will receive these Presidential working groups once a month at the White house but I will feel free to call their members anytime a major development arises.

The challenges ahead of us are very important, and it is the reason why you the American people deserve to have the best team ever put together work for you.



The numerous element of Financial and economical crisis as well the two wars have created the perfect storm to destroy Obama and his Presidency

That is why it is important to set up these Presidential working groups that will have two advantages:

First the scope of knowledge and intelligent fostered by these groups is unmatched in the USA and in the world

Second when the republican are going to hunt President OBAMA if he becomes President then they will have to attack the people who advised the President some of them being the most respected icon in the Republican party. It is an important feature that will allow Barack Obama to govern.

Must be careful on denomination of these groups because there is already a council of economic advisors for the President at the White house

These Presidential advisory groups must be informal at least in the beginning.

But they must exist and advise the President at the White house


If we are close to the election, I will make this speech but a few days after I will make sure to focus and energize young voters who could be a little pained by the selection of older men and women.


Bonus for candidate Obama

I still believe that the surge per say did not work

It is not the surge of 30 000 soldiers that achieved success, it is the change of commander and the new friendly relation with the tribal Sunni chiefs due to our diplomacy that made the success, not the surge of 30000 troops.

The main element was and is the new Commander in Iraq General Petreaus who not only is the best Commander we have had for a long time but defined a new doctrine that seems to work.

In short; It is the General Petreaus and his new doctrine and not the surge in soldiers that has turned around the bad Iraqi situation into a better situation, it is not the addition of 30 000 soldiers.

The surge was misnamed;


Phone: 310 231 02228


Thinking outside the enveloppe in the following article:
The Great Commanders in chief in History;

LA 11/10/98/ht


                  As history has proven it, The House of Representatives and Senatorial Midterm Election has always been favorable to the Party not holding the White House. The Republican Party who was not holding the White House, was considered a favorite in this election, but instead of winning more seats in the Congress they lost a few seats, and they acknowledged their defeat.

                  In the wake of this defeat, the Republican, Speaker of the House, Mr. Newt Gingrich resigned. What does that say? It says that Mr. Newt Gingrich was wrong. He was wrong in being the main force, relentlessly pulling his Party behind him to direct the Party into focusing in to impeaching President Clinton and trying to remove him from office under such flimsy grounds.

                  The second message to him and the Republican Party was directly sent by the American people. A very important number of polls, all indicating that the American citizen didn't want the Republican Party going unfairly after the President. The Republican party made a mockery of the results of the polls, thus making a mockery of the feelings of the citizens of the United States.

                 The resignation, which was more of a dismissal of Newt Gingrich is leading to the election of a new Speaker of the House, and probably change in other key positions in the Republican Party.

                What is extremely unfortunate is that the candidate to succeed Newt Gingrich is way too similar in thought and action to Mr. Newt Gingrich. This choice is going to have a major influence in the year 2000 election. With this Mr. Robert Livingston being a less flamboyant, but identical political twin of Newt Gingrich. The leadership of the Republican Party is the same.

                 Once again, the Republican Congressmen are not listening to the American people. This is a very good situation for Democrat candidates for the presidency in the year 2000.

It is a sad day when anybody can witness the blindness of the leaders of the Republican party.




December 3, 1998





           Of course we have to start by referring to the Constitution of the United States. An offense that should be addressed by the impeachment process is characterized by treason, bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors. This impeachment process is applied to high ranking members of the government, including judges for example, and of course, the President of the United States.

          Although there has been many debates with a lot of bad faith arguments, the problem is really easy to solve .

          First: The founding fathers and the writers of the Constitution can be safely considered as intelligent people due to their outstanding accomplishments.

          Second: The only goal of the impeachment process is to remove the President of the United States from office so that he can not harm the nation anymore. The regular justice system will take care of the punishment.

          Third: The only important matter is:
                     Question: Why would you find it necessary to remove the President of United States from office?
                     Answer: Because the President is not fit anymore to conduct the nation, which means, to do for the people the business of the people.

           Fourth: Why would you create such a high profile, complex, demanding system if the goal was only to convict the President of the United States, and fine him? The goal is to protect the nation by removing the President from office.

           Now we can easily address the meaning of high crimes and misdemeanors: the definition is: any crime or misdemeanor that prevents the President of the United States accomplish the business of the American people he was elected for.

           Let me give you a few examples to show what is or is not an impeachable offense. A Captain of a ship, who is revered by his crew, by the owner of the ship, took the ship through many storms and hurricanes to a safe destination, the Captain has a remarkable standing around the world.

          One day this Captain was to meet the owners of the boat and he, in the tradition of the Marines had always been immaculate, but as he entered the office of the owner, one of them noticed that the brass buttons on the Captain's uniform were tarnished, and he pointed it out to the Captain and asked why. The Captain answered that his aide didn't do it, probably.

         Actually it was a lie, the Captain was the one who forgot to polish the brass buttons, and because one of the owner's cousins was an apprentice sailor on this ship, the owner learned that it was the Captain who forgot to polish his brass buttons.

         Now the owners have two options, 1) fire the Captain because he lied about the tarnished brass buttons, or, 2) keep the Captain, compliment him on his job in general and ask him to make sure that his brass buttons will always be shiny.

           In the reality of today, President Clinton's impeachment inquiry, the American people and they are the owners of the ship named the United States of America, over whelmingly said, "let's keep such a good Captain at the helm of our ship.

          The answer is now very simple, you do not impeach a President of the United States if he is fit to lead the country, and has not committed any crime in the conduct of the business of the American citizen.






December 22, 1998

           What about remembering the meaning of Democracy: DEMOCRACY IS THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE.

            In a very large, modern nation, the citizen elects some of their fellow citizens because the nation is so large and populous that it is necessary (because one hundred plus million American citizens, of voting age, can not congregate in one place to discuss or elaborate on politics or laws) to elect somebody you trust, that will represent you and your ideas to take care of your business in the political scene.

           A representative of the people is elected by those people to be their servitor, which means to represent fairly their feelings and desires for their country.

           The only high crime against the citizen that elected them, and against Democracy in general, is to betray the confidence of the citizen and to vote against their desires. IN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE A BETRAYAL OF THE CITIZEN BY THE REPRESENTATIVE IS MORE THAN A HIGH CRIME, IT IS AN ASSASSINATION OF DEMOCRACY.


            A coup, which comes from the French word, "coup d' 'Etat", is an illegal taking of the power. Some coups generate bloodshed, some coups are done without a drop of blood spilled, and that is the one we are going to study.

           A bloodless coup needs absolutely all the following elements:
            1) An INSIDER: a person who has a good reputation and has the trust of the party in power, but who has friends in the party who want to illegally take power. He is the most important person of the conspiracy.
            2) A GROUP OF VERY DETERMINED PEOPLE, decided to overthrow the government, whose ethics is elastic enough to renegade on their oath, which is to serve the people of their country.
            3) THE CITIZENS EVEN IF THEY OPPOSE THE COUP, have been deprived of any power to counteract the coup.

           These are the three elements that are necessary to succeed in a coup. (We will apply this program on today's events, to see if interesting things show up).

            1) The INSIDER, who was portrayed as a man of integrity, and who was nominated by the legislative branch, and thus had the confidence of the government as an independent counsel, right at the heart of the matter, is Mr. Kenneth Starr, whose ties with Clinton haters are undeniably, (Mr. Melon Scaiph. The leader's of the tobacco industry, for whom Kenneth Starr was a lawyer and others).

           This independent counsel was so unfair in his inquiry that everybody in the opposing majority party, as well as the minority party, and everybody in politics, agreed that the statutes of the independent counsel should be changed. It was the only point where his actions brought a unanimous approval, to change the inadequate rules he abused so much. THE INSIDER, WITH THE BLESSING OF THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH WAS OUT TO GET THE PRESIDENT, he did that misusing the tools given to him by the law.
            2) THE GROUP OF VERY DETERMINED PEOPLE, who had the best motive to destroy President, Bill Clinton, are the ones he flatly beat in fair contests at every election. Instead of using the tools of Democracy (fair election by the citizen's of their country) they embarked in an absolutely un-democratic way of over-throwing the President, by organizing a coup. These people are the members of the House of Representatives, of the senate, they are the leaders of the Republican Party.

           Backing them are the two other groups who have the most to lose if President Clinton remains in office, such as the tobacco industry, as the Democratic Administration is trying to curb the use of cigarettes and tobacco, in general, and many extreme, right wing Republicans, whose constant defeat in fair elections, but also, constant defeat in the polls, showing the American citizen in favor of President Clinton in the extraordinary percentages of 70% to 75%, drive them into hatred. These right wing Republicans are unable to accept the rules of Democracy.
            3) THE CITIZEN, EVEN IF THEY OPPOSE THE COUP, admirably followed the rules of Democracy. They expressed themselves through the Freedom of the Press, and the Freedom of Speech, which in modern-day-America, are the polls.

           They also went to the voting booth on election day and again and again voted in support of President Clinton. But then, the representative elected by the American citizen refused absolutely, to listen to them. That is the kind of crime that kills Democracy. It shows to the American citizen that the politicians are worthless people and act as tyrants, making people nauseated about the way Democracy is conducted in the United States.

           So in the year, 1998, in the most advanced country in the world, the United States of America, we are witnessing a coup organized by the very people who are supposed to defend Democracy , they are the leaders of the Republican Party.





January 8, 1999

            In a very interesting twist of events, Larry Flynt a porn magazine publisher has saved, at the same time, the United States Democracy and the Republican Party, by exposing the newly elected Republican, House of Representatives leader, Mr. Livingston.

           The main reason is because Mr. Livingston, being very similar in thought to the previous Republican Majority leader of the House of Representatives, Mr. Newt Gingrich. Mr. Livingston will have continued the very damaging partisan, mudslinging behavior that was Mr. Gingrich's. Mr. Livingston was far from being very convincing when he explained that he was going to work in a bypartisan way.

          Mr. Newt Gingrich's and Mr. Livingston's attitude and agenda had driven their Republican Party to the lower ratings in opinion for many decades.

           Thanks to Mr. Larry Flynt, who exposed Mr. Livingston on his unethical sexual behavior and forced him to resign. Another Republican was elected as his successor.

           His successor, contrary to two previous Republican House leaders, seems to be a man who said, with passion, that he will work for the American people's agenda in a bipartisan way.

            If this proclamation is true, it will revive the Republican Party, give a chance to its candidate, and work for the American people as it should be in a Democracy and not for the revengeful agenda of some of the Republican leaders.




February 16, 1999

                          PRESIDENT CLINTON'S ACQUITTAL


            Friday, February 12, 1999 was an historical day in the life of the United States of America. The Senate had to vote and decide if President William Jefferson Clinton was guilty, or not guilty of the charge of perjury and obstruction of justice that he was accused of.

           This verdict had to be passed with two thirds of the senators votes. In a senate of 100 members, 64 senators had to vote guilty in order to convict the President. Only 55 voted to convict on the perjury charge and 50 voted to convict on the obstruction of justice charge. it was a vote strictly on party lines

           The wise provision made by the founding fathers to ask for a two thirds majority can prevent, most of the time, a party to organize a coup to overthrow an elected President of the United States.

          What is extremely interesting in this impeachment trial is to see, because of the amount of passion involved, the feelings and conduct of the American people and the feelings and conduct of the politicians. It was possible because of the media coverage to see the politicians as naked as if they were in a fish bowl, and the sight was not pretty. On the other hand, the feelings and conduct of the vast majority of the American people were of fairness, common sense, consistency and above all educated.

           THE UNITED STATE OF AMERICA SHOULDN'T HAVE THE SLIGHTEST PROBLEM to govern itself in the next millennium because the people of the United States, in this crisis, have shown all the qualities cited above and as we are in a Democracy, which is, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, there shouldn't be any problem.

           Unfortunately, the representatives of the people, members of the House and Senators, all Republican Congress Men and Women elected by the people of the United States refused to listen to them and to carry their will, and doing so, indeed they broke the fundamental contract in a Democracy and committed the unforgivable act of not listening to the very people who elected them.

           The Congress Men and Women had a very anti-democratic conduct during the impeachment of President Clinton, they show, unfortunately for them, that not only they were not interested by their own constituent opinion, but that they were absolutely willing to go against their constituents ideas of how to govern the United States. They clearly showed their desire to rule from the top like kings and dukes or counts functioning exactly like an oligarchy, (which is a government by a small elite, who makes a decision for the people).

           And amazingly, it's a recurrent pattern, always using the same tools, the witch hunt strategy and always trying to overturn an election, embarrass the government. So this very small, so called Republican elite, has nothing to show that could be counted for Republican principles. They regret the time when you could be the ruler of a little kingdom, and not pay attention at all to the people.

           BACK TO INDEX



The only team capable of rescuing the USA from the Abyss it has been pushed into by President Bush is composed of:
President: Nancy Pelosi, Vice President Colin Powell
President Colin Powell, Vice President Nancy Pelosi

Make no mistakes the situation in the world and specifically in the middle east which includes Iran and Iraq and the horn of Africa is so volatile that there is going to be a war or many wars for the next 10 years if not fifty years.
In addition the American deficit, the poor state of US manufacturing, an appalling system of education, abandon of Civil rights, debasement of the constitution need serious attention .

The Team of Nancy Pelosi and Colin Powell in their complementarities can address all these problems.
Together they have the knowledge, they have the experience and intelligence as well as the backbone to undertake this gigantic task.
These problems should be listed and comparisons with other countries should be part of this document and of course the solutions should be provided in this document called :

Eric Lafayette
Email: ericlafayette@fordemocracy.com
Tel: 1 310 500 8771


September 30, 1998




                What is interesting to watch in the last days of September are a few events that speak loudly for themselves, especially if we keep in mind that the Congress is ruled by a Republican majority and that the Judiciary Committee is ruled by members of the Republican Party including the Chairman and that they are adversaries to the Democrat President, Bill Clinton.

                 You only had to witness as soon as the Starr Report was delivered to the Congress, how fast the Republicans, who controls the majority and can make the decisions by themselves, decided to make public the Starr Report. (hundreds of pages).

                 They were in a frenzy to use the copy machine so that they could make public without even reading it in details, the report in 48 hours. Of course, to embarrass the President.

                 They also decided to release extremely quickly the video tape of the President's testimony, although the position of the President in front of the Grand Jury, as all the other positions should have been kept secret.

                  But on the other hand they did not want the Linda Tripp audio tape released, they wanted only an edited script to be released and finally there will be only an edited version of the tape released because these tapes were not incriminating the President.

                  The Republicans didn't want the rest of Kenneth Starr's documents that he has not released made available because they were not incriminating the President.

                   Some of the Republicans who voted in favor of the release of President Clinton's video tape didn't want their vote made public. So you can see how unfair the Republican Party is behaving.



November 18, 1998




                  We now can clearly state that there is an obvious pattern of Sadam Hussein's strategy against the United States of America that follows American policies.

                   Recently, before the November, '98 election, President Clinton's standing was not running very high because of the constant unfair attack from the Republican Party leaders based on the Starr report.

                  This recurrent strategy was applied by Sadam Hussein anytime the President's authority was hampered by Republican leader's mud slinging. Of course, Sadam Hussein thought that President Clinton was weakened, and it was a good time for him to provoke a crisis with the United States of America through the United Nations by stopping any cooperation with the United Nation's inspector's in charge of monitoring Sadam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction.

                 After the American citizens spoke through the election and sent a clear message to the Republican Party leaders that they were supporting their President and blaming the Republican leaders for their constant mud slinging at their Commander-in-chief. The President was able to implement a firm policy, including a large Air Force strike, against Sadam Hussein, and Sadam Hussein seeing that he didn't have any allies left in the Republican Party to undermined the President's authority, had to back down.

Democracy worked again: by supporting their President against the leaders of the Republican Party, The American Citizen's gave President Clinton the authority to overcome the threat to America.

                  Republican Party leaders are working against democracy in the United States and they should be held accountable for that.




January 25, 1999


           As we stand now, January 25, 1999, we have arrived at the point of a motion of dismissal by democrat, Senator Byrd.

            This last Friday and the weekend was full of evidence.

            Prior to this weekend, Senator of the Republican Party and Senator of the Democrat Party had achieved a truly remarkable bipartisan agreement, which can be summarized in the following lines.

           1) Equal time for both the accusation and the defense to present their cases.

            2) The decision to call witnesses would be decided by a vote.

            3) The constitutional prerogative of the Senate to make its own rules.

           As they have been doing exactly that during the impeachment process in the House of Representatives. The Republican Manager of the House began to cheat again. They called the witness, Monica Lewinsky, even if they say it was a simple, friendly talk, they had to enroll Kenneth Starr to force her to this first interview against her will.

           By not asking the Senators for their authorizations, they force the breaking of the bipartisan agreement between the Democratic and Republican Senators and it was strongly resented by the Democratic Senator. They were able, again, to bring bias and nauseating partisanship in the process, that was so far at a much higher level. Unfortunately, the leader of the Republican Senators, Trent Locke, went along with them, showing how thin his bipartisan credo was.

           Basically, they brought to the Senate what we could call the despicable conduct, quote, " Only the end result counts", and you can use any indecent means to achieve it. They brought their own disgusting behavior to the floor of the Senate, enrolling the most hated man in the United States, Kenneth Starr, who himself behaved exactly like a bounty killer.

           By enrolling Kenneth Starr, who went to the judge, Susan Wright Johnson, to ask her and obtain from Monica Lewinsky to testify. Then they told the Senate: "You said to us the House Manager, that you the Senate were the only one, who could rule in this matter of convicting President Clinton, but we, the House Manager disregarded your rules, can spat in your face and went to another jurisdiction".

          Monica Lewinsky was interviewed by Kenneth Starr and the House of Representatives, and of course, at the end of the interview, Monica Lewinsky's lawyer, who was present, told the Press that she had nothing new to say, that what she had said before in her twenty-two testimonies, and that her testimony will not change, but of course, the House Manager said that Monica's interview was very interesting and productive.