so crazy it actually worked, redux

thought i might revisit a certain 2018 post:

art:

dr. zola:	schmidt believes he walks in the footsteps of the gods.
col. phillips:	hmph!
dr. zola:	only the world itself will satisfy him.
col. phillips:	you do realize that's nuts, don't you?
dr. zola:	the insanity of the plan is of no consequence.
col. phillips:	and why is that?
dr. zola:	because he can do it!

(tommy lee jones and toby jones in "captain america: the first avenger", 2011)

life:

what was our idea with donald trump?

for four years and two days ... it was necessary to get to everyone in the brain and grab all possible means of mass perception of reality. ensure the victory of donald in the election of the us president. then create a political alliance between the united states, france, russia (and a number of other states) and establish a new world order.

our idea was insane, but realizable.

(konstantin rykov, kremlin social media agent)

the gop finally settle on an impeachment strategy

reliving doonesbury's watergate

only the names have changed ...

original 1973 artwork © g.b. trudeau:

so crazy it actually worked

from putin's top troll at the kremlin ...

what was our idea with donald trump?

for four years and two days ... it was necessary to get to everyone in the brain and grab all possible means of mass perception of reality. ensure the victory of donald in the election of the us president. then create a political alliance between the united states, france, russia (and a number of other states) and establish a new world order.

our idea was insane, but realizable.

(konstantin rykov, kremlin social media agent)

... which proves we are now living in a comic book universe:

dr. zola:	schmidt believes he walks in the footsteps of the gods.
col. phillips:	hmph!
dr. zola:	only the world itself will satisfy him.
col. phillips:	you do realize that's nuts, don't you?
dr. zola:	the insanity of the plan is of no consequence.
col. phillips:	and why is that?
dr. zola:	because he can do it!

(tommy lee jones and toby jones in "captain america: the first avenger", 2011)

the smoking gun?

dominoes revisited

we've been here before, haven't we?

one year in

the trump retirement plan

quote of the day

from the booman:

i've never seen a fringe movement take control of a party's soul and mind like this before. i was hoping that the governance of dick cheney, george w. bush, and karl rove was the worst the right could offer, but it's not even close. the republicans have been cynical so long that they've been taken over by the duped. ... the republican party that impeached clinton was dangerously insane. they took it up several notches after 9/11. but what we're witnessing now is of a totally different scale. the parasite has taken over the host.

shoulda, woulda, coulda

s'funny how what sounded impossible a coupl'a years ago sounds like a slam-dunk today ...

nader:	what about the more serious violations of habeas corpus. you know after 9-11 bush rounded up thousands of them, americans, many of them muslim americans or arabic americans and they were thrown in jail without charges, they didn't have lawyers, some of them were pretty mistreated in new york city. you know they were all released eventually.
napolitano:	correct.
nader:	is that what you mean also about throwing people in jail without charges violating habeas corpus?
napolitano:	well that is so obviously a violation of the natural law, the natural right to be brought before a neutral arbiter within moments of the government taking your freedom away from you. and the constitution itself, as the supreme court in the boumediene case pretty much said, wherever the government goes, the constitution goes with it and wherever the constitution goes are the rights of the constitution as a guarantee and habeas corpus cannot be suspended by the president ever. it can only be suspended by the congress in times of rebellion which in read milligan says meaning rebellion of such magnitude that judges can't get into their court houses. that has not happened in american history. so what president bush did with the suspension of habeas corpus, with the whole concept of guantanamo bay, with the whole idea that he could avoid and evade federal laws, treaties, federal judges and the constitution was blatantly unconstitutional and is some cases criminal.
nader:	what's the sanction for president bush and vice president cheney?
napolitano:	there's been no sanction except what history will say about them.
nader:	what should be the sanctions?
napolitano:	they should have been indicted. they absolutely should have been indicted for torturing, for spying, for arresting without warrants. i'd like to say they should be indicted for lying but believe it or not, unless you're under oath, lying is not a crime. at least not an indictable crime. it's a moral crime.
nader:	so you think george w. bush and dick cheney should even though they've left office, they haven't escaped the criminal laws, they should be indicted and prosecuted?
napolitano:	the evidence in this book and in others, our colleague the great vincent bugliosi has amassed an incredible amount of evidence. the purpose of this book was not to amass that evidence but i do discuss it, is overwhelming when you compare it to the level of evidence required for a normal indictment that george w. bush as president and dick cheney as vice president participated in criminal conspiracies to violate the federal law and the guaranteed civil liberties of hundreds, maybe thousands of human beings.

(hat tip to crooks and liars)

what's your sign?

because my camera decided to poop out on me last weekend, i came back with just a single shot of my entire trip to washington last weekend. it was taken the night before the march, as i was checking the camera at a friend's house in philadelphia. the picture shows the sign i would carry throughout the next day. the camera pooped out after taking the shot.

but what the flying spaghetti monster takes away with one noodly appendage, he/she/it gives back with another.

during the march, someone liked the sign so much that he offered me 50 dollars for it right on the spot. since the sign was double-sided (in fact it was two complete signs taped back-to-back), and since i didn't want to go without it, i separated the two halves and gave one to the guy for 20 dollars.

photo by dave hill © 2007.

like writing on toilet paper

it sounds like bush is getting tired of all the carping know-it-alls-without-a-plan:

president bush on saturday challenged lawmakers skeptical of his new iraq plan to propose their own strategy for stopping the violence in baghdad. "to oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible," bush said. — "bush: war skeptics 'proposing nothing'"

but if bush is genuinely interested in seeing other plans, he need only check his inbox.

it's where he'll find, among others, the murtha plan, the kerry-feingold plan, the biden plan, the edwards plan, the levin-reed plan, and not to mention the baker-hamilton plan, otherwise known as the iraq study group plan, which bush already sounds familiar with, since he was recently overheard describing it as "a flaming turd".

and then there are the seemingly daily growing roster of freely-dispensed blogger plans like the johnson plan. it's plainly apparent to none but the willfully blind and deaf that at this late date there are no lack of thoughtful alternatives.

unfortunately (and i do say this with the utmost respect to all those who have been applying the necessary brain-power and wisdom that's been heretofore lacking in this debate) all these plans represent nothing more than idle academic masturbation. they're all quite pointless. and that's why you'll find no trademarked and patented "aarrgghh plan" on this site.

because unless the first step in your grand strategy reads:

my grand strategy for iraq by carping know-it-all 1) remove george bush and dick cheney from office.

... then your plan is nothing but toilet paper.

because unless you're willing to let events continue to spiral for at least another two years, george bush will give your precious plan all the due consideration he gave to the over-anticipated iraq study group report — that is, as steve gilliard remarked, he'll "wipe his ass" with it.

which leaves us with only one plan — the only one that matters — the kagan plan, more fondly known as "the surge".

and what makes this one plan oh-so irresistible to the commander-in-chief?

frederick kagan, 36, is the author of choosing victory, a blueprint for the surge adopted by president george w bush. just as everybody had begun writing off the influence of the neocons at the white house, genial, chubby-faced frederick gave the muscular intellectuals a lease of life. it was at camp david last june that kagan, a military historian and fellow of the american enterprise institute, outlined his plans for pouring more troops into iraq to bush and his war cabinet. donald rumsfeld, the then defence secretary, was unimpressed, but kagan's views got another hearing when bush was searching for ways to ditch the seemingly defeatist recommendations of james baker's iraq study group. "wow, you mean we can still win this war?" a grateful bush reportedly said. — "... bush's final baghdad gamble"

for the president's clarification

george w. bush, addressing the press in the white house rose garden:

this debate is occurring because of the supreme court's ruling that said that we must conduct ourselves under the common article iii of the geneva convention. and that common article iii says that there will be no outrages upon human dignity. it's very vague. what does that mean, "outrages upon human dignity"? that's a statement that is wide open to interpretation. and what i'm proposing is that there be clarity in the law so that our professionals will have no doubt that that which they are doing is legal. you know, it's — and so the piece of legislation i sent up there provides our professionals that which is needed to go forward.

the geneva convention, article 3, regarding the treatment of prisoners of war, in force since october 21, 1950:

in the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the high contracting parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions: persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. to this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; taking of hostages; outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. the wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. an impartial humanitarian body, such as the international committee of the red cross, may offer its services to the parties to the conflict. the parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present convention. the application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the parties to the conflict.

now tell us again, george — just what part is it that's "vague" and "wide open to interpretation"?

no, george, this "debate" is not occurring because of any wrist-slap from the supreme court. the geneva convention did not pass unmolested for more than a half century because no one noticed how pretty the plain and bespeckled old bird was. so too with the constitution and your craven efforts to play peeping tom on its citizens.

no, george, after spending your two terms shamelessly defiling both the convention and the constitution, your flabby virgin backside juts exposed to charges of war crimes and impeachment and you need your rubberstamping posse running congress (but running it for not too much longer) to cover your unsightly naked emperorship.

our worst fears

elizabeth dole is afraid. very afraid. the country is headed toward disaster.

as in a terrorist attack? another katrina-sized storm? an incurable pandemic? financial collapse?

not exactly — but the enemies are at the gates.

as in osama? zarqawi? iran? north korea?

not exactly —

associated press: washington — the head of the senate republican committee paints a dire picture of democratic congressional control, warning that the opposition party would "put the war on terrorism on the back-burner" and maybe even impeach president bush. in a fundraising appeal this week, sen. elizabeth dole, r-n.c., asks for immediate financial help "to prevent the most left-wing democrat party in history from seizing control of the united states senate" in the november elections. ... in the fundraising letter, dole rails against liberal democrats in the senate and warns that if they prevail, "our worst fears" will be realized. she argues that empowered democrats would "increase your taxes, call for endless investigations, congressional censure and maybe even impeachment of president bush, put the war on terrorism on the back-burner" and "take over the white house in 2008!" she assured the recipients of the fundraising letter that she was working around the clock "to help our country avoid this disaster."

all hyperbole aside, while the country might not be on the edge of extinction, senate republicans most certainly are, and who would know better than their own nervous staffers, whose continued well-being depends wholly on their bosses' uninterrupted incumbency, as related by one purported congressional insider:

as many of you know, when congress is in session, most of my working days are spent on the hill. i have contacts on both sides of the hill and both sides of the aisle on both sides, people i have known for years and chat with. the republicans on both sides of capitol hill are running scared right now. very scared. the staffers i know on more than one committee have been told that if the republicans lose the majority in november, they will lose their jobs, so now is the time to start making connections with representatives and senators in safe seats, republican organizations, friendly lobbyists and the like and putting together resumes. there is a mood of despondency in republican circles, and the conventional wisdom in some of those circles is that loss of at least one house is inevitable. the conventional wisdom is also that loss of one chamber will be disastrous because the resulting investigations will bring the whole house of cards crashing down around the party's ankles.

if i were looking at not just unemployment, but probes and trials and sentences, i'd be scared too. come november, a lot of republicans may be grabbing their ankles.

season opener

even though vermonters were among the first townsfolk to set the state impeachment initiative in motion, they were quickly overtaken by illinois and california, whose resolutions beat theirs in the race to their respective state legislatures. (see my previous post "tremors".)

not to be outdone, some vermonters chose not to wait for their state representatives to weigh in on their resolutions, which were introduced last week.

this morning they delivered three resolutions to speaker of the house dennis hastert. they also secured a promise from their congressman bernie sanders to see that their resolutions would be duly introduced to the floor:

at 9:00 a.m. et this morning ellen tenney of rockingham, vermont, and julia dewalt of newfane, vt., presented to the staff of speaker of the house dennis hastert petitions from three towns in vermont (their own two towns plus marlboro) calling for the impeachment of president bush. the towns had each passed resolutions to send the petitions. these are the first of many petitions from towns, cities, and possibly states across the nation that will be arriving at congress's door. they are presented under the guidelines of jefferson's manual, section 603, and will be referred to a house committee, probably the judiciary, for consideration. similar resolutions have now been passed by at least 13 cities and towns, and have been introduced in three state legislatures, with more expected this week. following delivery to hastert's office, tenney and dewalt visited congressman bernie sanders' office, and his staff promised to make sure the speaker's office followed through by sending the petitions to the clerk and to the house judiciary committee.

without a doubt the legitimacy of their municipal resolutions will be challenged. without a doubt they will be quietly tabled, as any initial attempts to move towards impeachment will be, legitimate or otherwise. but without a doubt more are scheduled follow.

so, as the first articles of any kind to reach the house, i officially declare impeachment season open!

let the games begin! it's going to be fun watching the republicans play impeachment whack-a-mole!

update:

thanks to commenter constant, it looks like any attempt to "quietly table" the resolutions will not be met without a fight:

the purpose of this isn't to fall into the trap of "waiting for" or "deferring to" "the committee." rather, the resolutions must — as was done with [the 1903 impeachment proceedings against florida judge charles swayne] — force the congress to vote on the matter. remember what was done during swayne: the florida proclamation directed/asked the full house to vote on the proclamation, then it went to committee. then — here's the key — despite the committee not agreeing over what happened with swayne — as is likely the case going to be with bush — the judiciary committee then had to provide the results to the full house for a second vote. we have to figure out how to do the same: force the house to confront this, and not bury it in committee.

tremors

it's definitely not your imagination, mr. president. those vibrations rumbling faintly beneath your feet since january — this week they're loud enough to hear.

can you hear it, mr. president — coming from the plains?

the bill urges the illinois general assembly to "submit charges to the u. s. house of representatives to initiate impeachment proceedings against the president of the united states, george w. bush, for willfully violating his oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the constitution of the united states and if found guilty urges his removal from office and disqualification to hold any other office in the united states."

can you hear it, mr. president — coming from the coast?

joining illinois, california has become the second state in which a proposal to impeach president bush has been introduced in the state legislature. and this one includes cheney as well.

there it is again — coming from up north!

more than a dozen lawmakers on tuesday introduced a resolution calling for president bush's impeachment, making the vermont legislature the second in the nation to consider such a move. [third in the nation, actually]

history was quietly made over the past five days when three states from across the nation, in rapid succession, made the first calls for impeachment ever introduced to any state legislature.

the state drive for impeachment takes advantage of an obscure, never-before-explored parliamentary procedure written by vice president thomas jefferson, which allows a state legislature to send impeachment charges to congress:

according to section 603 of jefferson's manual, "there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion": 1) by charges made on the floor by a member of the house; 2) by charges preferred by a memorial filed by a house member; 3) by charges contained in a resolution introduced by a house member; 4) by a message from the president; 5) by charges transmitted by a state legislature, or a grand jury; 6) by facts developed and reported by an investigating committee of the house.

even more intriguing, once transmitted to the house, impeachment charges supercede all other pending business:

a direct proposition to impeach is a question of high privilege in the house and at once supersedes business otherwise in order under the rules governing the order of business. it may not even be superseded by an election case, which is also a matter of high privilege. it does not lose its privilege from the fact that a similar proposition has been made at a previous time during that same session of congress, previous action of the house not affecting it.

as noted by method 1, the normal avenue for impeachment requires that articles be introduced first in the house of representatives. if passed, the charges are then taken up by the senate. until now, this was the way impeachment had always been conducted.

such charges have yet to be introduced to the house. however, in december 2005, articles for an inquiry into bush's misconduct, for consideration toward a move for impeachment, were introduced by rep. john conyers, who has since introduced motions to censure bush and cheney. in march senator russ feingold lobbed his own censure bombshell into the senate. facing perfunctory opposition from the republican majority in congress, these articles of course have failed to gain any traction in either house, even among democrats.

but the growing pressure to rebuke the president in any fashion, like the magma churning beneath the earth's crust, has to be channeled somewhere, somehow. the state initiatives represent fissures that the congressional republicans have little hope of plugging at once and for all, because the movement is made up of dozens of small municipal committees across the country working together, with the aid of the blogosphere, where it was born. similar resolutions from committees in new mexico, north carolina and wisconsin (home to senator feingold) continue to surge upward from the lowest strata of our political landscape.

of course, each initiative still must breach two major thresholds: passage in its own respective legislature and passage in the house of representatives. but in january this was dismissed a crackpot idea. in less than four months, eruptions around the country are already being felt. by summer, house republicans fighting for their continued relevance may be further burdened with the silly spectacle of being forced to play impeachment whack-a-mole.

so you might want to grab hold of something, mr. president — you may be in for a rocky ride this summer.