How much of the money your readers donate to you spend on cigerettes supporting big tabacco? Why dont you stop supporting big tabacco by quitting and use that money to fund your cause instead of asking for donations?

OT alert -

More fun from Ohio:

H. Douglas Talbott, a former top aide to two Ohio governors, told federal authorities that Republican coin dealer Tom Noe persuaded him to contribute $2,000 to President Bush's re-election campaign - then reimbursed him for the donation, The Plain Dealer has learned.

Talbott appeared Wednesday before a federal grand jury in Toledo that is investigating whether Noe illegally reimbursed as many as two dozen contributors to a Bush fund-raiser in October 2003. The grand jury is looking into whether Noe made the reimbursements to circumvent campaign finance laws, which limit individual contributions to $2,000.

Brad - I just put the link for the Brad Show on my "Radical Rebel" homeschoolers and friends elist. This is a VERY eclectic and politically active group. I've seen them in action, they are courageous and tireless, and already informed and involved in many of the same issues as those of us on this blog.

Good luck on the show this weekend, I'll be listening while I work if I can.

Wow. Looks like a fabulous line up. Gonna try ...

Sorry for the OT

Conquest Communications Group's Rouges' Gallery.
An avalanche of Arseholes.....OK! OK! Assholes for all my American friends!

Hey - what a great show Brad. Wow.

Here's an interesting read:

BuzzFlash Interview with John Bonifaz Author of "Warrior-King: The Case for Impeaching George W. Bush"

======================
For those who indulge in a bit of
"cheesy" humor, a video of some
great animation:
Cheese Emporium
======================

SHEROLE EATON Being from Ohio may know something about the pimping of the president (link here), or the Ohio coin scandal (link here) which was reported about here at BB quite a while back (link here).

I wonder if some of the protection of the teflon neocons is wearing off?

I don't want this to be missed and it seems relevant here, so I'm re-posting:

KestrelBrightEyes comment from another thread:

UPDATES!!!

Conyers reaches & extends signature goal - Raw Story

Protest draws attention to minutes (memo) from St. Pete Times

Kerry to push for Bush Impeachment on Monday - from the Conservative Voice

*

Come senators, congressmen, please head the call
Don't stand in the doorway, don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt will be he who has stalled
And the battle outside, it is raging.
It'll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times, they are a changing....

Thanks Kes!

Ah well --- here's another side to the "Kerry push for Impeachment" article:

Conservative Spin on Kerry Statement

For Kira and Kestrel: I'm aghast that Kerry would move in the direction of impeachment based on the Downing Street minutes, when he hasn't said a purposeful word about election fraud since Nov. 2.

I can't fathom his motives here. But it's terrific news nonetheless. Maybe Dredd and/or other legal beagles can offer a theory.

By Sher Zieve

John Kerry announced Thursday that he intends to present Congress with The Downing Street Memo, reported by the London Times 1 May 2005. As reported by NewsMax, the memo purports to include minutes from a July 2002 meeting with Tony Blair, in which Blair ostensibly said that President Bush’s Administration “fixed” intelligence on Iraq in order to justify the Iraqi war. In an interview with the Standard Times, Kerry said: "It's amazing to me the way it escaped major media discussion. It's not being missed on the Internet, I can tell you that."

The Boston Globe published an article by Ralph Nader, Tuesday, in which Nader also called for President Bush’s impeachment. The story is being carried on Michael Moore’s website and the Democratic Underground. Failed presidential candidate Kerry advised that he will begin the presentation of his case for President Bush’s impeachment to Congress, on Monday.

ANYBODY KNOW ABOUT THIS ?

http://www.theconservati...article.php?storyid=6057

sorry I'm a little slow

There goes Kerry sounding for all the world like a poodle, commenting on how the minutes missed major media discussion. It's the same way he "poodled" up to *sh during the debates when he could have made toast out of him again and again and again and again ... you remember.

It's amazing to me that someone who is such an intellectual can sound so ... dumb?! At least so out of touch.

We'll see what happens and bless Kerry if he plans to rip *sh a new one.

Do it Senator Kerry! No more Mr. NiceGuy.

Do it for the kids dying in Iraq --- all because of a BIG LIE and BIG COVER-UP. Don't be complicit in it. Stand up for what is right ... DAMMIT.

Has John Kerry won Ohio yet?????

I'm still just a little bit wary of Kerry too. His actions so far are rather lazy IMHO, he should have been right there at the front helping with election reform. He's got a lot of work to do before I'll be impressed with him.

Still, the more the merrier - and at this point I'll take ANY sign of life from the Dems.

The best news to me is still the speed and number of signatures Conyers has collected. To me it says that people are starting to wake up and pay attention.

That rumbling sound you heard was a subtle paradigm shift. It won't happen overnight, but the reign of the neo-cons is ending.

Hope "whats his name" adds this to the "Minutes"

It was a huge air assault: Approximately 100 US and British planes flew from Kuwait into Iraqi airspace. At least seven types of aircraft were part of this massive operation, including US F-15 Strike Eagles and Royal Air Force Tornado ground-attack planes. They dropped precision-guided munitions on Saddam Hussein's major western air-defense facility, clearing the path for Special Forces helicopters that lay in wait in Jordan. Earlier attacks had been carried out against Iraqi command and control centers, radar detection systems, Revolutionary Guard units, communication centers and mobile air-defense systems. The Pentagon's goal was clear: Destroy Iraq's ability to resist. This was war.

http://www.thenation.com...i=20050613&s=scahill

But there was a catch: The war hadn't started yet, at least not officially. This was September 2002--a month before Congress had voted to give President Bush the authority he used to invade Iraq, two months before the United Nations brought the matter to a vote and more than six months before "shock and awe" officially began.

Kira #13
I disagree. Kerry did make toast out of Bush at debate #1 & #2 and that's why he won the election.

Great Blog from Arianna Huffington concerning the Downing Street Minutes.

Re: bUSHW@CKER #21:

I loved her final line: "We can only hope that if a Deep Throat emerges on Iraq, he will have the good sense to get in touch with a blogger."

CATHERINE A
Re: Arianna's last line.....Yes, nodding in furious agreement

Here's a piece comparing a young Bob Woodward with the present day version and the MSM malaise in general.

The Idiot President's War.
The House of Bush!

Robert Lockwood Mills #10 Concerning Kerry moving for impeachment.

That is significant, because he is quite calculating and tends to like to skip things that are really controversial. And as you say, since election fraud has not been one of his big interests, this sudden change toward impeachment is perplexing.

Conyers has been beating the drum for some time in the house, now action in the senate. Good.

I can only hope it is because there is a shift in votes. But I doubt, still, that there are enough votes for a serious impeachment action.

Stopping Bolton, which was considered a much more doable thing, was a rough road even tho Kerry and other dems worked hard on it. We still don't know what will happen there.

The merits for the impeachment case seem quite good ... there is no real doubt that the admin wanted to invade Iraq from day one, or even before by some accounts, of President Bush's term.

And there is little doubt that they ran a hard sell campaign to cover that up and to spin all intelligence toward that end.

We all remember the "mushroom cloud" talk of Rice and Cheney, and that the US could be hit with WMD from Iraq. That was all a planned propaganda campaign. That is illegal when it is a campaign to deceive congress and get a war going.

But like the rest of us here, I keep wondering why Kerry et. al. are not beating the vote machine fraud drum because the political fallout against the bu$hit crew during an impeachment process could be enormous.

But what good is it if the votes are covered up again in the '06 election?

That is why I think if we get anything out of this is should be verifiable ballot trails ... ATM quality.

Conyers says the business of congress is compromise. I would expect this impeachment process to open up an opportunity work out a compromise to remove vote machines everywhere that do not have a verifiable paper trail.

And maybe even a constitutional amendment giving the people the federal right to vote for president.

Of course it also moves further in the direction of congress no longer being a rubber stamp of the administration. That is also good.

From reading the links on Kira's posts #8 and #9 above, Kerry's words have been misinterpreted. He did not say anything about impeachment.

Kerry said he would promote a Congressional investigation into the events leading up to the US going into war in Iraq, as a result of the Downing Street minutes. This is good, but not the same thing as saying Bush should be impeached. This is in line with Dredd's #24 observations about Kerry being calculating and avoiding controversy.

There is more than enough material for impeachment. In fact, no president has ever laid out a better case against himself. We'll probably have to look after 2006 (with significant election reform), but events can sometimes be very surprising. I think the whole thing is being held together right now by MSM fantasy and congressional cowardice --- which hardly constitutes a solid foundation of permanence.

Check out Sourcewatch. This administration's actions border on treason if they are not well into it. The Constitution's impeachment provisions, IMO, apply to the current situation or they have no meaning at all.

Catherine A #25 Good eye and good point.

We need to be careful about what we say and post so as not to start wildfires that damage credibility.

I don't think Kerry would make a precipitous move unless the senate vote landscape had changed. It can happen but the senate goes slower than that most of the time.

Besides, unless it hits the MSM, it is not going to bite. Sunday's "This Week" or "Meet The Press" would be early tests of the water. If it is picked up there, the story could get traction.

But I am on record (link here, and here) saying that the nature of the offense is not the controlling factor in terms of impeachment. The MSM and Senate are.

I think as the '06 election approaches the change in the vote landscape in the Senate can also change. But the incremental approach, which you think Kerry is taking, is a better strategy than going for impeachment all at once.

There may well arise impeachment proceedings, some day. But first I want the facts - just the facts, man! All the facts, out in the open for all to discuss! That's what Little JFK should go after for starters, IMHO

Dredd #27 (and everyone else talking about '06)

How are we going to change things by having an election - at least the way things still stand?

That's why it seems so urgent to IMPEACH them.

Haha SeattleDem! I keep forgetting that part about Kerry winning the election. And I still say - Kerry missed opportunities to absolutely fry the moron. Was he just being too nice?

MMIIXX - can't wait until Monday to see what Kerry does say. I wonder if this will be televised anywhere. Anybody know?

By the way - when I said Kerry was sounding ... dumb ... I'm referring to the highlighted part of his quote below:

"I think it's a stunning, unbelievably simple and understandable statement of the truth and a profoundly important document that raises stunning issues here at home. And it's amazing to me the way it escaped major media discussion. It's not being missed on the Internet, I can tell you that."

Surely, though, he knows the media is blacked out on anything not complimentary to the neoIdiots ... he does know this, doesn't he?

Even impeachment won't restore democracy.

I found interesting a recent observation on BBV that eyebrows were raised when Kerry suddenly won the Democratic nomination (with Diebold optical scan equipment), when the hand ballots showed Kerry & Dean neck and neck.

There are lots of people I'd rather see in the Presidency rather than Bush (almost anyone). That said, there are also plenty of others I'd prefer to Kerry. In all cases I'd most like to see fair and open elections that reflect the people's wishes, whatever they may be.

And I mean the peoples' wishes--not the interests of big corporations or whatever lobby group has the most funds to throw around. Right now the "system" doesn't allow candidates who reflect the peoples' wishes to survive very well. (You can't run unless you're very well connected to people/interests with a lot of money.) Massive reform of the whole elction system is needed, including campaign financing laws.

And I would be happy to see Bush impeached, too.

Catherine A

Absolutely --- but --- impeachment will remove the WORST pResident (and admin) EVER. WORST by far. and in almost EVERY SINGLE WAY.

Everything is in such a mess. The iron fist control on our press (media) keeps the others (who WOULD AGREE with us if they only knew) in the dark. A large percentage of our population don't know what is really going on because they still trust the media.

"Through clever and constant application of propaganda people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise."

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, 1923

Kira #32

I agree. I'd like to see a whole crowd of folks in the current government impeached.

Is there any precedent for impeaching more than just the President?

Catherine A #33

Good quiestion. I don't know about any precedent for impeaching an entire Administration. I do know it's always been a hard job to impeach officials and it's only been successful a few times (to my knowledge.)

Dredd --- this is a good question for you!

For folks who will be listening to the BradShow tonight and blogging here with us, I thought I'd re-post the link to Torqued's Community Assistant. Making links and using emoticons was never easier!

Bradblog Community Assistant

OT, but I have to share this with you guys. There was a story in the Tallahassee Democrat, linked from Raw Story, "Test shows voter fraud is possible"

The following letter is from my friend from CCN (Clark Community Network), who is writing a book on election fraud. She's secured a website where she'll be posting her book when it's complete and I'll keep you guys posted on that... Here's her letter:

Dear Ms. Nash,

Good day
ms in la

If 6 or 7 people would like to respond to Ms. Nash, her email addy is: Jnash@dos.state.fl.us

Hey, is there a way to prosecute Ken Blackwell? I'd love to see that son of a bitch in jail.