| Home | About Us | Login/Register | Email News Tips |

A liberal dose of news, national and local politics, commentary, opinions and common sense conversation…

ACLU Runs Ad Calling for Investigation of Bush

by RonChusid

The ACLU is calling for a special counsel to investigate whether Bush violated his oath and broke the law with his NSA spying program in an ad in today’s New York Times. A copy of the ad and related documents are posted at their web site.

18 Responses to “ACLU Runs Ad Calling for Investigation of Bush”

  1. Or “NASA” according to “Prezident Bunnypants”. So Ron and Pamela, Mark Crispin Miller is on airamerica now, talking with Mike Malloy (filling in for Randi). Maybe I did hear inklings of this when it first happened, but what about this conversation that Miller had with Kerry in which Kerry supposedly said he thought the election was stolen. I guess when this hit the blogs and such at some point later, Kerry’s office strongly denied it. What was the deal there? Did Kerry think this was in strictest confidence or what?

  2. Sue,

    Piecing together the reports from each side, my take is that Kerry spoke about some of the irregularities under investigation. However, being a cautious former Prosecutor, Kerry did not make any accusations which he could not prove, such as saying that the election was out right stolen.

    Being a somewhat sensationalistic writer, with the desire to create publicity to sell a book, Miller made the conversation sound more sensationalistic than it was, resulting in the denial from Kerry’s office.

  3. Hmm, thanks Ron. I agree that Kerry would not be so careless as to make any comments that the wingnuts would run with and spin. However, Miller did make some good points. It’s kind of ironic how you describe him and his motives. He said something along the same lines of why Al Franken won’t come out and call the election stolen either. I think it comes down again to this akward balancing act between the somewhat older Democrats and their understanding and comprehension of how the process works and the games that sometimes have to be played, and the younger progressives who are too often quick to thrash and point fingers but aren’t always the most realistic on solutions. I hope we can all get it together…and damn soon!

  4. IF I MAY CLARIFY…Yes, I realize Miller isn’t a kid but you know where I was going here with the thoughts on the various factions of Dems/progressives. Thanks.

  5. Sue

    There’s links to a couple of posts here about the MCM claims –
    http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/index.php?s=Mark+Crispin+Miller

    Now that I am home I need to listen to JK’s interview from Sunday on and see what he said about this.

    Ron

    Did you get a chance to listen?

  6. What we know in our hearts of hearts and guts can’t be proven to a certainty. And that’s the real shame of any election, not to be certain. With electronic voting difficult to stop, will be narder. I hope at least we stop the disenfranchisment, but even the ID cards and other draconian solutions don’t favor us.

    Mark is very defensive on his tour now, and I think what he said was provactive. He could have shared Kerry’s take on the incidents, the GAO report, as long as he doesn’t claim Kerry thought he was President.

    However, when you see Kerry addressing a group, he gets that wry grin when someone mentions something about really president. You can imagine that Teresa is very forthcoming in private conversation, and shaking the head yes, while Kerry just knowingly grins.

  7. We’ve had supposed smoking guns before, Downing St Memo, so we’ll see how much slack the public and media give Georgie spying because of the terrorism, whatever that is.

  8. Pamela,

    I read through some of those links before I left the office. This will be quick because I’m at the second job. Did you hear Miller on with Malloy? I agree with Mike Malloy – why be afraid to call it what it was, another stolen election? I don’t agree that we can never know, have the transparency, etc. Maybe someone will be inspired to be the whistle blower (especailly if the heat gets turned up on Deibold the way it is on Enron players now and flipping becomes in vogue throughout). Yet still, our corporate controlled media won’t be there to cover the true story.

    Just like we don’t like when people might be quick to thrash Kerry, we can’t be too quick to thrash someone who seems a bit out of the supposed mainstream or accepted thought when they make a claim. This gets back to my more important issue raised earlier about how do we all work together – from old “yellow dog” dems to bloggers and everyone in between. I think each of the splinter groups has something to bring to the table.

    Now, not to stir up a real hornet’s nest here, but honestly, like many others, I never did understand why John conceded as quickly as he did.

  9. Sue

    If the vote margin had been closer like it was with Gore it would have been much easier. 3 million votes is too many to call stolen, even with Ohio in doubt. If something turned up that proved there was amssive fraud, the concession does not hold water. A lot of new things have now come to light. With out support of the House and the Senate we won’t get far, and all the Malloy’s and MCM’s can say what they are saying but unfortunately there’s not a lot that can be done.

  10. Sue,

    I don’t mind if someone in the media, etc, screams that it was a stolen election.

    It is a totally different matter for someone like Kerry to do so, considering the lack of proof.

    Kerry didn’t conceded until he ran the numbers. There were not enough provisional or absentee ballots for the result to change. The only thing that could have changed the result would have been if proof could have been uncovered of actual fraud–and if that happened the concession would have been meaningless. Actually the concession had no legal bearing in any situation. If anything happened which gave Kerry Ohio’s electoral votes, Kerry would have won in the electoral college regardless if he conceded.

    To date there has been no evidence to prove fraud. If fraud has not been proven yet, there was no way Kerry could have proven it in the narrow time frame between election night and when Congress certified the electoral vote.

    People are much too impatient over this matter. It is better that the investigations and court hearings procede where there is a chance for change than to have Kerry scream theft and blow his chances to really achieve justice.

  11. Well said Ron and Pam. :)

  12. Well, I disagree Ron. How can one be “too impatient” over stolen elections and blatant, continued misue of power? To be quite honest, while I would like to hope for the best, I’ve become more of a realist. While I would like to see Kerry take his rightful place in the next race, I have to say, I don’t think it’s going to happen. I don’t know if the damage that has been done to our democracy will ever be overcome. By the way, I’m a little disappointed that you guys haven’t addressed my quesitons about working together with the old and the new factions of the party going forward…no matter who our leaders may be.

  13. Sue

    I’ve been on and off all day with my DSL connection and trying to get settled in after a week away – so I’m not up to speed here on the conversations on the blog – sorry about that.

    There’s a lot of factions in the party that need to learn to work together and develop a cohesive message. My personal opinion is we can do a lot better if we learn to stop beating ourselves up. Not all progressive and activists bloggers see things that way though. In time I hope that changes. We try to maintain a good of level of support here for the work of all our Dem leaders and no doubt we will continue to do so, no matter what happens in the future.

  14. Pamela,

    That is true, but the centrist or corporate side of the party will also need to compromise some issues to the progressive end. They should not expect the progressives to hang around just because “They are not Bush” (the centrist Dems). I think the vote fraud issue is a big one, and there are people from all walks dealing with it, but at this point it must be put into perspective and approached realistically, legally and with efforts to have laws enacted and people to change procedures in their respective states in order to correct the abuse.

    Mark miller is also involved with those type efforts, yes he dogs the issue as he seems there should be more outrage from the press and public. Miller is more of an outraged Constitutionalist and believes people from ALL parties that believe in the constitution should be concerned, as he believes the actual voting process is being removed yet another step away from the average citizen. I do not disagree with that. Miller is I believe a tenured professor, I do not think he needs the money, but I am sure he would like to get his message out. I would say he gets somewhat obsessed with his causes, but I do not consider him sensationalist. I know he is an academic and being on his mailing list I also know he is more then willing and very good at sending out retractions and or corrections when needed, or has sent what proves to be false data. We need astute sentries like Miller, Moore,Amy Goodman etc…they are the bell ringers, without them democracy is doomed.

    We also need to know all of us at this site belong to the absolutly most diverse poitical party in the world, and in order to keep it that way we shall need to work on the mechansims that allow us to be heard within the party. That is no small feat, because of the diversity there are many voices to talk over. Also there is big money to overcome, but if it is to occur it will be within this party, I only hope.

    I think everone has made well taken and viable points within this post at this time, so we need to find the commonality of our beliefs, respect each’s opinion which in the end most on this site do. And one of our tasks will be to address the voter / election issues that certainly need to be corrected and work for an honest vote for each and every American.

  15. Sue,

    You can be “too impatient” by demanding (as many are) that Kerry and other Democrats take counterproductive a actions to protest, which would ultimatley reduce the chances of election reform.

    The goal is to achieve election reform and investigate what occured in past elections to uncover fraud if it occured. Making claims that the election was stolen before obtaining the necessary evidence undermines the credibility of those who push for election reform and reduces the chances of success.

    If a writer makes such accusations it doesn’t hurt, and may make some happier, but it doesn’t change anything. Note the Salon article which argues that Miller failed to prove his case in the book. Ultimately what he does is meaningless. What Kerry does is significant and we can’t afford for him to be discounted as Miller has been.

    We’ve often discussed the need for a large tent here, including working with those we don’t completely disagree with. We’ve also been critical of those like Kos who are harming our chances for success by their devisiveness.

  16. Ben,

    Along those lines I’ve been disappointed with the centrists for thier position on Iraq. (I’m speaking of those who have supported the war and equate opposition to this war with failing to back a storng defense.)

    Expanding the party to more centrist economic positions was important to help counter the out dated perception of Democrats as being far leftist on economic matters. Having such centrist views included is of value, but this does not mean sounding centrist in areas where they are totally wrong (the war) also makes any sense.

  17. Ben

    In discussions about the Miller incident earlier we discussed the need for voter reform and the fact that we can’t achieve this without more support from Congress. It’s a real catch 22 sadly. We need the bell ringers and the whistleblowers in this fight too, but ultimately the laws will only be changed whem we have more control of the Congress.

    Whatever was said between Miller and JK was a private conversation in passing. People have private conversations with JK and likewise with other politicians all the time and what is said does not get passed around the blogosphere.

    If I am told something in confidence in a private conversation, it stays that way. Sometimes things are said, that I know categorically, it’s not appropriate for me to repeat on this blog or anywhere else. In my book, MCM broke a bond of confidence and possibly took what was said to him by JK out of context. MCM does have a cause, respected professor or not – he has a book to sell.

    If you are refering to big money in the context of clean elections. Yes, we need that. JK and others fought for that a few years ago and the outcome got twisted.

    Ron and I do strive to keep the Dem Daily focused as a voice of commonsense amongst the blogosphere. It doesn’t help the party that bloggers are constantly attacking our own and we keep out of that fray. Although we feature a lot of news from JK we regularly point out what other Dems are doing, including as Ron pointed out, some whom we do not always agree with.

    The voter reform issue will remain a hot issue until it is fixed. There’s a lot of hot issues right now. If we focus on one, the rest get sidelined.

    Everything is cyclical in politics. Serious damage has been done to our system by the Bush administration, but in my opinion it’s not irreparable. The sooner more Dems get that working together is too our benefit, the better.

  18. Thank you, Ben! You articulated some things very well that I was too tired to put into words.