DISMISSAL
OF PAULA JONES SEXUAL HARASSMENT CASE
April
6, 1998
UPDATE
ON SIGNIFICANT EVENTS
Mr.
Clintons 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 Presidents
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; Im going by the law of this country, Im
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, were not a tribe with gurus and witch
hunters as it was in the McCarthy era. So, heres 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
SIDNEY
BLUMENTHAL SUBPOENAED
:
One of President Clintons aides, Sidney Blumenthal was subpoenaed
by Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel to be interrogated by
Kenneth Starrs grand jury about his alleged indiscretions
with the press. Starr is trying to convict him on obstruction of
justice.
Comments:
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 Starrs action. This investigation is violating the
inner circle of families, (Monica Lewinsky mother)
something they wouldnt 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.
BOTTOM LINE :
a. Question
Are Kenneth Starrs
actions endorsed by the People of the United States thus following
the essential rule of democracy?
Answer
No
b. Question
Are Kenneth Starrs
actions appropriate and worthy of modern democracy?
Answer
No, he is following
the footsteps of the infamous McCarthy.
c. Question
Did Kenneth Starr
become an anti-democratic persona?
Answer
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
AUTHOR'S COMMENT.
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.
BACK
TO INDEX
-------------------------------------------
ATTORNEY/CLIENT
PRIVILEGE
6/11/98
Again from the point of view of democracy the last of Kenneth Starrs
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 Starrs 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.
AUTHORS
COMMENT
We can very safely
say that with no emergency to do so, Kenneth Starrs 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.
BACK
TO INDEX
---------------------------------------------------
September 30, 1998
WHAT IS THE
OPINION OF THE AMERICAN CITIZEN AND THE MEANING
OF THE POLLS?
What is the opinion of the American people about their President,
Bill Clintons 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 its 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 youre 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 dont
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 dont
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 Clintons 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.
BACK
TO INDEX
-------------------------------------------
September
28, 1998
WHAT IS THE
OPINION OF THE OTHER NATIONS ALL OVER THE WORLD?
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, Ive
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 Clintons 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 dont know the polls, they dont 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.
BACK
TO INDEX
--------------------------------
September 30,
1998
WHAT IS THE
OPINION OF THE CONGRESS; REPRESENTATIVES
AND SENATORS?
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 Presidents 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 didnt want the rest of Kenneth Starrs
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
Clintons video tape didnt want their vote made public.
So you can see how unfair the Republican Party is behaving.
BACK
TO INDEX
--------------------------------
December
3, 1998
WHAT
IS THE DEFINITION OF AN IMPEACHMENT OFFENSE?
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 merchant Navy had always been immaculate,
but as he entered the office of the owner, one of them noticed that
the brass buttons on the Captains uniform were tarnished,
and he pointed it out to the Captain and asked why. The Captain
answered that his aide didnt 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 owners 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 Clintons impeachment inquiry,
the American people and they are the owners of the ship named the
United States of America, over whelmingly said, "lets
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.
BACK
TO INDEX
-------------------------------------------
December 3, 1998
WHAT
IS THE DEFINITION OF AN IMPEACHMENT OFFENSE?
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 Captains uniform were tarnished,
and he pointed it out to the Captain and asked why. The Captain
answered that his aide didnt 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 owners 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 Clintons impeachment inquiry,
the American people and they are the owners of the ship named the
United States of America, over whelmingly said, "lets
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.
E.L
BACK TO INDEX
LA 11/10/98/ht
TURMOIL
IN THE POLITICAL SCENE, ELECTION 11/6/98
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 didnt 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.
BACK TO INDEX
--------------------------------------
November 18, 1998
SADAM HUSSEIN
AND THE NOVEMBER, 98 ELECTIONS
We now can clearly state that there is an obvious pattern of Sadam
Husseins strategy against the United States of America that
follows American policies.
Recently, before the November, 98 election, President Clintons
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
Presidents authority was hampered by Republican leaders
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 Nations inspectors
in charge of monitoring Sadam Husseins 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 didnt
have any allies left in the Republican Party to undermined the Presidents
authority, had to back down.
Democracy worked
again: by supporting their President against the leaders of the
Republican Party, The American Citizens 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.
BACK
TO INDEX
THE REPUBLICAN
COUP
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.
WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS
FOR ORGANIZING A COUP?
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 todays 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 leaders 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 citizens 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.
BACK TO INDEX
LARRY
FLYNT RESCUES THE REPUBLICANS
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. Gingrichs. Mr. Livingston was far from being very
convincing when he explained that he was going to work in a bypartisan
way.
Mr. Newt Gingrichs and Mr. Livingstons 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 peoples 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.
BACK TO
INDEX
January 25, 1999
PRESIDENT
CLINTON IMPEACHMENT TURNING POINT
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
Lewinskys 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 Monicas interview was very interesting
and productive.
BACK TO
INDEX
--------------------------------------------------
February 16, 1999
PRESIDENT CLINTONS 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 SHOULDNT 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 shouldnt 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, its 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 GOOD PRESIDENT AND THE
GOOD VICE PRESIDENT
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
or
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 :
THE REBUILDING OF THE UNITED STATES
or
THE RENAISSANCE OF THE USA
Eric Lafayette
Email: ericlafayette@fordemocracy.com
Tel: 1 310 500 8771
------------------------------
KOSOVO:
WHERE IS PATRIOTISM
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 Clintons 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.
THE RESENTMENT OF THE REPUBLICAN
CONGRESSMEN/WOMEN, AFTER LOSING THEIR COUP TO IMPEACH AND REMOVE
CLINTON IS STILL LEADING THE WAY THEIR PARTY REACTS.
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.
BACK TO INDEX
---------------------------------------------------
KOSOVO:
WHY THE USA WENT TO WAR
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 murderers 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.
BACK TO INDEX
NANCY PELOSI: A PATH
TO RESCUE THE USA
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.
Why?
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.
HE HAS COME BACK 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.
SIGN HIM UP.!
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 MISSON IS NOT TO SECURE BAHGDAD or ELIMINATE THE INSURGENCY
or DISARM THE ROGUE MILITIA. WITH ONLY AN ADDITION OF 30 000 TROOPS,
IT IS MISSION IMPOSSIBLE.
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.
THE MAIN GOAL OF THE MILITARY MISSION IS TO STRENGHTEN THE HAND
OF THE DIPLOMATS WHO WILL BE ABLE THEN TO NEGOCIATE FROM A POSITION
THAT IS NOT ABSOLUTE WEAKNESS.
ONLY COLIN POWELL COULD
GUIDE A PERSON OR A PARTY OR THE USA
IN CRAFTING A COMBINED NEW MILITARY STRATEGY - DIPLOMATIC STRATEGY
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
ericlafayette@fordemocracy.com
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.
--------------------
Notes
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
Email:
ericlafayette@fordemocracy.com
website:
www.fordemocracy.com
Thinking outside
the enveloppe in the following article:
The Great Commanders in chief in History;
www.fordemocracy.com/2006iraq.htm#thegreatcomandersinchief
|