Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Monday, November 28, 2005

Remember the 14th

Phase II status report was promised 14 November 2005.

We have nothing. Congress has a problem they need to solve.

There are alternatives.

* * *

The key is to remember: The President has the problem; the Senate Investigation is merely a distraction from the original problems within the Executive Branch.

The trick the White House is using: Diverting attention from the failed leadership, and "making the issue" into "whether the Congress/Senate is or isn't doing something" and "whether the messengers in the CIA did or didn't do something.'

Those are called, "Red herrings" or "irreelvant issues" from the real problem: What did the White House do or not do that it should have done, or "malfeasance."

* * *

Update: 3 Dec 05: Senate obstructing Phase II investigation.

End update

* * *

Congress agreed to provide on 14 November 2005 a status of Phase II investigation into the 9-11/WMD issues in re the intelligence.

The only information we have is the 4 Nov 2005 information, Ref; Ref; Ref.

We were promised detailed information on 14 Nov 2005.

We were told that the six Senators would provide a response.
The three Republicans and three Democrats are to report back to Senate leaders by November 14.Ref

The letter provided only has three signatures.

This means the promised response, despite it being meaningless, does not meet the original agreement to include a joint statement which all six [6] senators were to report to the Senate leadership.

The Senate has failed in meeting the deadline.

They tell us it is impossible to determine.

The deadline has passed.

The detailed status report was not provided as promised.

The only thing we have is:

  • "We are unable to provide an estimated completion date"
  • "An agreement was not reached"
  • "It is not possible to predict the length of time needed to produce a final report"

    They don't know.

    That is not acceptable.

    This note outlines a broader discussion of this failure; and hopes to act as a catalyst to answer, “What is to be done?”

    Discussion and comments.

    In other words, the deadline was an insufficient catalyst for leadership to analyze what was going on, come to an agreement as to the way forward, or what would be done to answer the questions.

    Six Senators were unable to respond to a simple question: "How are we doing?"

    They don't know.

    This is a leadership failure.

    * * *

    To be clear, the Congress of the United States is unable to provide any assurance that the material information which voters need before the November 2006 election will be available.

    This is unacceptable.

    Thus, the American voters and public at large should be encouraged to make what is called "Adverse inferences" about the original information, inter alia:

  • What was or was not done in re 9-11, WMD, and Iraq;

  • What was or was not done as required by statute;

  • What was or was not done to adequately investigate; and

  • What was or was not done to ensure the official conduct of the American government and its agents was or was not consistent with the rule of law, American Constitution, and their oaths of office.

    * * *

    Let us review what the public was led to believe what was going to happen:
    Frist has asked that three members of each party meet in private to figure out what phase two of the Senate investigation should entail and that they return on November 14 with a plan. Ref

    A reasonable person reading the MTV material would conclude:

  • The six senators would meet

  • They would agree

  • The product of that meeting would be a single plan

  • The plan would include a reasonable estimate of the work involved; the approximate time, resources, and staffing support required to achieve that outcome; and various indicators to assess progress along a performance baseline

  • The plan would include milestones with specific success criteria for the report with agreed-to questions to be answered, with various success criteria to evaluate the progress of the report relative to those answers

  • Success criteria would be included

  • There would be a mention of specific measures of performance to assess to what extent the final report, as it was being developed, was or was not meeting specific success criteria at interim milestones

  • The interim milestones would include success criteria so that staff members would know whether progress was satisfactory; whether the information in the report, as it was being generated did or did not meet the objectives of the agreed-to-plan; and whether the progress toward the final report was likely to achieve the agreed-to-objectives of the plan.

    In so many words: On all counts, the Congress of the United States has demonstrated that they cannot plan and have no "plan to get a plan."

    Bluntly, a reasonable person reviewing the "best available information through the American media" would conclude there is a disconnect between:

  • A. What the public should reasonably expect; and

  • B. What the Congress provided.

    This is unacceptable.

    * * *

    Let's consider what other nations are doing while the Americans "figure out" what they're doing.

    Via TPM: The UK is moving forward on the WMD investigation.

    Note the UK Parliament rejects the Butler report.

    What is the American's excuse for "no information on the status" as promised by 14 Nov 2005?

    No answer.

    * * *

    This problem is one for Congress to address. It is their job to come up with a plan: A plan to "figure out what is going to happen, along some meaningful milestones."

    If you have no plan, then you need to have a "plan to get a plan."

    This Congress has neither.

    This is not a response to the 14 November 2005 deadline.

    The issue for Americans is: Why should we care; and what can we do.

    First, you can write your Senators and let them know that you believe that they’ve let you down.

    Second, you should encourage your friends to make “adverse inferences” about the original problem: There appears to be some sort of incentive for inaction. Legally, this is known as malfeasance; and appears to be related to corruption, bribery, or some other form of valuable consideration for official inaction.

    Third, you should encourage your friends to make known to law enforcement and the US Attorney’s office any information you have that would explain:

  • Why officials have failed to perform a duty they had agreed to do;

  • Who may have paid funds to encourage non-performance.

    * * *

    The important thing to keep in mind is that we’re dealing with multiple levels of alleged malfeasance within Congress.

  • A. First, we have the original wrong doing in re 9-11 and the WMD issues;

  • B. Second, we have a promise by the Senate to complete Phase II of those investigations, but no formal response; and

  • C. Third, we have the promise by the Senate to provide status of that Phase II, but no response.

    The objective of Congress, as they get further into this mess, will be to distract attention from the original abuses, and focus on “why the public has a problem.”

    It would be useful if the country would recall the lessons of the Iraq-WMD non-sense, and realize despite what officials may say publicly, those involved in the actual operations may have quite another view.

    Congressman Murtha has made several trips to Walter Reed and found out first hand what seemed to elude Congress: Things were not going well.

    In that spirit, it’s time to begin some serious discussions about the alternatives facing the American public. This note doesn’t attempt to provide a laundry list of actions items; nor does it presume to have the answers.

    Rather, at this point, the thrust of this note is simply to lay out what we do know; what we may have to assume; and why this issue needs to be reviewed in the context I propose.

    * * *

    Deadlines are important, especially when someone imposes a deadline on themselves, but they fail to act.

    The problem the public has is that the 14 November 2005 deadline was not an official act of Congress; nor did it attach specific statutory or legal consequences for failing to act.

    In the future, what may be needed are some specific statutory consequences on specific Congressmen if they fail to act and meet specific deadlines.

    Also, what may be an option is to have a triggering mechanism that mandates Congressional hearings when Congress sets a deadline like this, but fails to act.

    Or, what could be an option is a trigger than will mandate that some sort of special master be automatically triggered that would oversee the situation and compel the Congress, Courts, and Executive Branch to jointly come to a status hearing, under penalty of perjury, and find out exactly what is going on.

    * * *

    The legal community traditionally takes the approach that if Congress designs a flawed system, like the Federal Election Commission, that is slow to act, the Judicial Branch will defer to the legislature and say, “This is what Congress intended.”

    Thus, we can conclude that given the 14 November 2005 deadline has passed that Congress intended for there to be no response, despite a promise to do so.

    * * *

    Some might suggest that this is a minor issue. That is the point. If Congress promises to do something very simple like “provide status on a Senate Investigation,” there’s little reason to believe they can handle something more complicated.

    Yet, despite this “apparent inability to do something complicated,” they do find the time to vote themselves pay raises.

    Why don’t they have a “Sense of Congress” that Federal Legislative Representatives should be paid $10Billion [Billion, with a B] each; that way they can bankrupt the country.

    Yes, there are limits.

    * * *

    To be fair to Congress, despite them being unfair to America, we should give them the collective chance, as they have given the administration, to come up with a “really good story” to explain this.

    Suffice it to say, their explanation is just an excuse.

    It is likely they’ll dream up some sort of fairy tale to make the public the cause for the problem.

    We’ll have to wait. Then again, how many more times are we to wait?

    * * *

    The issue of deadlines is important of international law. When we consider the UN Security Council deadlines on Syria and Iraq, Secretary of State Powell and Rice have both emphasized that deadlines are to be met.

    It is curious that the issue of deadlines is important when it comes to matters of “creating an excuse to invade other countries,” but that standard doesn’t apply to the United States.

    Congress, despite its ranting over “all the deadlines Saddam hasn’t met” has shown that it doesn’t take deadlines seriously, unless Congress decides to be serious.

    * * *

    Again, the fundamental truth is that this problem is one for Congress to solve; and the issue for the public to keep in the back of their minds is: What is to be done.

    * * *

    The larger perspective is what are the implications of this “busted suspense.” Bluntly, we can take a macro and mirco view of the problem.

    Simplistically, all Congress had to do by the 14th was simply make a one line statement. That didn’t happen.

    In turn, what we can infer is that some sort of Congressional-staffer-meeting-review did not occur; and that there was insufficient coordination among the various Senators, despite their agreement to cooperate.

    In a larger picture, we have to consider the implications: If Congress, as a body, cannot solve a simple problem like, “What is the status” and timely report that as promised, we have to ask: What are the more difficult problems which Congress is unable to work with the Executive; what are the risks to the American public if these failed-mechanisms result in a worst case scenario; and what would the public like to have “been done in advance” had this to-be-realized-disaster addressed now in 2005, as opposed to it happening.

    In other words, the failure to meet a simple suspect sends a clear signal that there is some sort of polarization in Congress, as we saw before Katrina; there is a underlying problem that is waiting to percolate; the failure of Congress to address a simple problem means the momentum of that underlying risk cannot credibly be argued to be mitigated; and it would be prudent for us to pretend we are looking back from 2007 onto 2005 and ask, “Now that we know there is this mess, what could we have done in 2005?”

    * * *

    I take the “busted suspense related to the 14 November 2005 deadline” very seriously. It is an indicator of the ability of Congress to work together after they have had a private discussion.

    * * *

    Let us suppose that the momentum underlying the current “gridlock in Congress” is related to either a national security issue; some sort of structural problem in re maintenance; or a larger safety of life issue.

    In 2005, it is not acceptable that Congress, because of its inability to solve problems, can be given a green light or pass in that responsibility.

    * * *

    Congress has something called legislative immunity. Perhaps there are times when legislative immunity should be ignored, and there be some specific, monetary damages imposed on named Congressional representatives for their failure to act.

    The record is not compelling when it comes to the Congress imposing sanctions for failing to follow ethics rules.

    The issue becomes, self-evidently, is if small infractions are not sanctioned, then what is to stop the abuses at a larger level? Self-evidently, we have greater corruption by the very personnel who are passing the laws everyone else is supposed to follow.

    * * *

    Some have suggested that, before the laws like the Patriot Act are passed, the Congress must subject itself to the same intrusions.

    I favor that approach: “If Americans must endure these violations of their civil liberties, Congress must subject itself to that process first.”

    * * *

    Adverse inferences are something courts make when a witness fails to produce information.

    In this case, let us suppose that Congress, as an entity, were appearing before a court. Congress has failed to provide information related to the original misconduct; and the subsequent investigation.

    A court could find that a “reasonable inference” is fraud.

    That Congress may or may not be involved in fraud is not news. The issue becomes: What else. Pick your statute.

    * * *

    The issue before us is: What “status” and “what facts” do the Congress not want the American public to know.

    These relate to issues of criminal law. It remains a matter of law for the court to decide to what extent, if any, specifically named Congressional representatives, their staffs, and members of the executive branch are involved in an alleged conspiracy to be silent about what originally happened in re 9-11, WMD in Iraq, and other matters the Senate originally promised in Phase II to review.

    * * *

    We now arrive at the issue of, “What does this failure to respond by Congress,” say about the culture and risks of doing business or interacting with Americans on a business and political level.

    Bluntly, it doesn’t really tell us anything new: Americans make worthless promises, are not to be relied upon, and are emerged in a culture of fraud, deceit, and are not reliable.

    Welcome to reality.

    The issue becomes: What is to be done.

    Bluntly, Congress is issuing worthless promises; and the statements they make do not amount to lawful contracts.

  • Are Congressmembers, when they make a promise, required to put that in writing under the penalty or perjury, with a specific promise to relinquish personal assets if they fail to perform on that promise; to which they receive a valuable consideration called a payment or a “salary”; and the public has shown some sort of damage or loss as a result?

    The problem is to show that the intended to not perform on that promise; or that they failed to perform on a promise they were required to fulfill; or that they have received something of value that, had the truth been known [they are not doing their job] would not be entitled to receive?

    Again, the issue the court, auditors, and investigators have: If the voters want to keep voting crooks, thieves, and unreliable people into Congress who make worthless promises and are not to be trusted – that is their choice.

    * * *

    What about duty determinations?

    The Executive Branch, when it faces someone in the Senior Executive Service who can’t do their job, will do something called a line of duty determination. This is essentially a look at the person’s individual record; and the overseeing authority asks: Is this person up to the job.

    Congress, under the Constitution, isn’t subject to any standard other than age.

    * * *

    Should Congress, in the future, be required to make statements about “we promise to provide this information under penalty of perjury; or if we fail to provide an answer we agree to resign, give up our paycheck, or do something that would show we have recognized we are punished?”

    That might be a catalyst.

    IN the future, it appears unless Congress specifically agrees to something, under penalty of perjury, to adjust its position to the negative for failing to do something, Congress cannot be relied upon to do its job, either as a body or individually.

    * * *

    Are there specific “promises Congress makes that are, or should be subject to a Grand Jury review?”

    In theory, there is a system of checks and balances in Government. But, in practice, under the American system, the courts do not check: They simply defer to “whatever Congress decides,” and may, on occasion, find a particular act of Congress unconstitutional.

    Ideally, it would be preferable that if there is a specific promise that a by-name Congressman or Senator makes, that the failure to meet that promise should amount to some sort of adverse result.

    In theory, the voters will take care of things. In practice, the voters may ignore something that materially affects the entire country.

    The issue, self-evidently, is what is a specific citizen in Indiana supposed to do when a specific Senator in New Mexico does not do something they promise?

    * * *

    The media, under the proverbial disinfectant and sunlight theory of government, provides a valuable check on power.

    But what is to be done when the media, under threat of “no access to that source” is denied the ability to talk about things which are sensitive?

    It would be nice if the public was informed of the “limits of the coverage” and “what agreements the media has made in exchange for access.” Have they agreed to not ask questions; or how are members of the “blacklisted media” vilified by those who have made agreements to be quiet?

    * * *

    Theoretically, the idea of government is to solve problems. But what happens when the government fails to solve problems; does not investigate; and refuses to provide information?

    Self-evidently, we no longer have a government. We have a body of people who get paid to do nothing, are rewarded for doing nothing, and materially affect many people, not just at home, but abroad.

    If the American government proves unresponsive or incapable, it will either self-destruct; or it will spread like a cancer; or it will reform from within; or it will change form without.

    We cannot undo the momentum.

    What can be done is to solve the problem.

    The issue Congress needs to ask is: Will a foreign power or entity that hopes to take advantage of this inertia/incompetence use that to undermine the Constitution?

    I would argue this has already happened, and is at the heart of Congress’ failure to review the matters. Bluntly, we are at the circular-reasoning mode.

    Congress needs to realize that if it does not solve this problem; and it denies the public the ability to bring claims to address these grievances in court; then the only option the Congress is allowing, through inaction, is the use of force on the battlefield.

    That is a non-starter. The nation of laws and the rule of law mandates we be civilized in the discussion.

    We do not advocate violence.

    But we have to ask, “If Congress refuses to do what it promises, and denies the public access to the information to make informed decisions; what option, beside unlawful methods does the Congress hope to be used to correct the problem which Congress refuses to address?”

    We would hope that Congress, not under threat of violence, but under threat of lawful sanctions, realize that they have a problem.

    They jointly agreed to simply “provide information” on the status of an investigation by a specific date.

    The response the public has been given is one of, “There is nothing you can do to Congress if we ignore our promise.”


    We do not advocate violence.

    * * *

    Now it is time for the public to let Congress explain itself.

    There may be a plausible explanation. There could be a really nifty story. Perhaps there is some brewing “larger crisis” that reasonably “got in the way” of Congress.

    We await something that resembles a response.

    But, Congress has already created the deadline: the 14th of November 2005.

  • Are we going to “wait for another deadline”?

  • Are we going to “patiently wait for Congress to promise something else” that proves to be “incapable of being satisfied”?

  • How many times do the “simple promises of a deadline getting ignored” are required for the public to take action at the ballot box?

    We do not advocate violence.

    * * *

    Some in the major parties have suggested there is some sort of “moratorium” on demonstrations until “after the election.”

    * * *

    To be clear, the 14th of November should be a reminder to all: That Congress has failed to keep a simple promise; and their internal controls are ineffective in ensuring that they respond to something simple.

    * * *

    Let us remember that that the larger issue is: What really happened in re Iraq and the WMD issues and 9-11?”

    It’s been four years since 9-11. That’s four seasons. One cannot blame the November 2005 weather for the inability to respond to the 14 November 2005 deadlines.

  • Which lobbyists have gotten in the way?

  • How much money was transferred to “not do” what they promised?

    * * *

    Next time Congress whines about “a stunt,” hold your breath: IT remains to be seen whether the agreement, in the wake of that stunt amounts to anything.

    Congress, as the President, have chosen to not review something.

    It remains a matter for the US Attorney to review to what extent, if any, specifically named individuals within the Executive and Legislative branches are cooperating to impede the flow of information for lawful investigations.

    * * *

    It is time a special counsel either be appointed; or Attorney Fitzgerald continue to appear before the court with the objective of expanding this probe in re Plame, WMD, and Iraq into something larger.

    Be mindful of what Attorney Fitzgerald said: Be calm.

    I sense he knows which lobbyists have an interest in suppressing the truth.

    * * *

    We’ve seen Americans at the toy stores fight over Christmas gifts. Let us hope that incivility does not spill into Congress, on the streets, or threaten specific people with harm.

    America needs some adult supervision. Either Attorney Fitzgerald and the Court can impose some discipline; or the needed catalyst may come from without.

    American TV companies are already making pilots about “What America might be like after it falls apart.”

    That seems like a fair warning that someone is contemplating a “Life after the American dream has ended.”

    It is a shame that Americans are not given the lawful tools to effectively discipline Congress in a timely way; and that the Congress is given the power to assent to tyranny, going so far as to not provide status of their own investigations.

    * * *

    America finds itself at the proverbial crossroads. There is no magic moat around America that makes it immune to accountability.

    Congress made a promise to provide information on the 14th of November 2005. It remains to be understood what story, if any Congress might wish to share.

    America needs to decide what it wants to do to discipline the unresponsive. This is a problem that is not unique to a specific party or branch of government.

    Americans show little inclination of caring until it is too late. If America chooses not to respond, then it is foreseeable that the TV Pilots will turn into real-life drama on Fox News.

    But the entire world will be watching, as they were during Katrina.

    If Americans don’t care about Congress, why should anyone in the world? They may sit back, enjoy the chaos.

    It’s all convenient distractions for 400 million Chinese who do not wish to be bothered to inform the world of a problem with bird flu or benzene spills.

    We’ve learned that problems within one nation cross borders. We might have said a few days ago, “Let us hope this is different. . . .”

    We can always hope.

    * * *

    The November 14th deadline has passed. Congress needs a wake up call.

    Please send your Senators and Representatives a letter communicating your concern. A promise should mean something. If Congress isn’t willing to do something simple, then we might as well stay home and watch the system come crumbling down under its own weight.

    Then, we can rebuild under the same Constitution, but a system that is responsive, not one that creates more excuses to do nothing.

    Also, please send a letter of support to Attorney Fitzgerald. Encourage him to have an open mind and look for what patterns of conduct or other factors related to the Plame issue may be affecting Congress in their desire to not provide the public with information on Phase II.

    * * *

    Enough of the pleasantries.

    What’s Congress’ solution to their self-evident leadership problem? There needs to be a special master that is charged with throwing these people around, finding out what is going on, and delivering to the public a straight answer.

    It is clear Congress and the staff is confused, incompetent, and not able to do something simple. It is inappropriate they be relied upon.

    Congress has to solve this problem within the rule of law. But what happens if Congress refuses to respond? We have no answer. Perhaps we need to have a Constitutional Convention to remind the Congress that we should have interim elections; that if a majority of the public believes it is time for a vote, we should close down Congress, send everyone home, and have new elections within 4 weeks.

    That would save a lot of time and money. Who would be able to raise much money for such a short election?

    It is arrogant that Congress would assert that the public “has to put up with” the non-response to the 14 November 2005 deadline.

    * * *

    The US congress and American have little credibility when they whine about “missed deadlines before the UN” but the US Congress can’t meet a deadline.

    Are we to believe that the only credible sanction on the US to get the Congress to “meet a deadline” is something that might resemble a UN General Assembly resolution?

    Let’s ask, before we consider that option, how many UN members would face sanctions by the US if they dare to vote on something that may be needed.

    Bluntly, if the UN is in no position to do anything, Americans are simply on a default-trajectory to more non-sense. That does not inspire, and Americans should not be confused why their failed system and buffoon leaders inspire in Iraq more attacks.

    What is America “fighting for” in Iraq: The right to set deadlines, but do nothing?

    That is not government, nor a “system” to be inspired.

    A government and a constitution are not the same thing. One can have in place a fine constitution with pretty words, but if the system fails to impose sanctions for failing to meet those standards, you might as well torch the document.

    America, self-evidently, has all but done that.

    * * *

    Rice’s statements before the world about Syria’s “non cooperation” apply to the US Congress.

    How many times has the US used the veto to “prevent Israel from being wiped off the map,” only to find out that it was Israel that was contributing to the problem: The Arabs were all alone, had their land seized, and the Americans told everyone, “Put up with it.”

    The Congress telling the American public to do the same: Put up with our promise to do something, but you can’t do anything if we don’t deliver.

    That is not impressive.

    * * *

    Congress appears to be getting away with not meeting its 14 November 2005 suspense because nobody has a solution. That, by definition, is a defective government.

    Why is government collecting money? To pay people who are in positions of power to not storm the building.

    * * *

    Americans should not wonder what happened in Louisiana in the wake of Katrina: People showed their true sides. Now we see the same things in stores around the country.

    American is a place that is based on a Constitution; but if Congress isn’t willing to “make it’s promises mean something,” then there really isn’t much to believe that Congress is serious about making more serious promises mean something.

    But, we see from Iraq, that when Congress is cajoled into doing something like granting unlawful power to the President to wage war without legal foundation, the Congress will go along with that, “Hay, it wasn’t us . . .the President lied to us.”

    Well, Congress went along with the lie – and self-evidently, doesn’t want to admit it was part of the lie: Failure of oversight, failure to ask questions, failure to do their jobs.

    Nothing new. Except, the Congress doesn’t want the public to realize what we’ve long suspected: That the US Congress isn’t any different than the corrupt, unresponsive, and failed regimes in Africa. At least they have the decency to spend their money publicly -- American “leaders” hide it, pretending they are “one of us.”

    * * *

    Let’s consider what could happen. If Congress can’t handle a simple problem like a deadline, it remains to be understood what brewing emergency is waiting to come unglued.

  • Who will Congress find as a scapegoat?

  • Which failed Congressional Staffers are going to pass another budget?

  • How many law firms will be asked to “review the matter” as Volker did with Anderson?

    Another fine mess to bury on page A26 of the Washington Post.

    * * *

    Why should American care about a busted suspense? Congress is wasting your money. They’re too stupid to solve little problems. God knows what kind of kickbacks are occurring with the contracts that get awarded with the annual budget.

    Want more highways to nowhere like we have in Alaska? Americans paid for that. And it tells us something about America’s future: It is a highway to nowhere.

    Maybe the Hollywood TV pilots for 2006 are a better roadmap: Plan on a radically different future in America, one where the public simply walks away and no longer recognizes America as it currently stands.

    Oh, but we can’t talk about doom. That might upset the goons in the Counter Intelligence Field Activity who are looking for an excuse to harass people, take them to Eastern Europe, and see how wet they can get their towels.

    How are those black ninja suits. Practice those hand signals. Nobody will figure it out.

    * * *

    The issue before us is one of internal controls. Congress, when they make a promise to do something simple, should have set up a checklist.

    Then, when the staffer looked at the calendar or the congressional correspond log should have said, “Wow, we have suspense on the 14th of November, we better do something.”

    But all that didn’t work. Thank you residents of Maryland and Virginia – you have proven yourself to be incompetent staffers. Or were you taking the train from up north in NYC and Connecticut?

    Mind you, the buffoons that failed on this aren’t the ones we can blame: The real ones we should blame are someone else who is a convenient scapegoat.

    * * *

    Congress is the one that agreed on this deadline. Nobody made them do it.

  • What happened to the Congressional Correspond logs?

  • What happened to the Congressional staffers?

  • If the staffers can’t handle something simple like this, what can we say about their boon doggle “staff visits” to places like GTMO, Abu Ghraib or Eastern Europe?

    Hay, if you want to make anyone believe you’re remotely competent in conducting fact finding, then you might want to do something that resembles a marginal level of performance in meeting a single deadline.

    * * *

    Will Congress have an investigation “into itself”?

    Will Congress “hold hearings” on why they are incapable of meeting a simple suspense?

    Should the GAO be called in; or does that only apply to cases where the Congress wants to diver attention from Congressional bribes and whip the Executive Branch?

    How about having a Congressional Government Oversight Committee look into this – oh, wait, they only oversee everything else. That explain why the post 9-11 Homeland Security mess [that self-evidently failed in re Katrina] didn’t get a “trial run” except by fire.

    * * *

    Congress can’t handle a simple deadline. What does this say about the “more complicated” things like overseeing the civilian agencies like law enforcement?

    “Oh, that’s not our job . . . “ Sure it is: 42 USC 1983, or something like it, could be a tool that Congress could pass to really kick the law enforcement in the groin and remind them of the Constitution.

    But, despite having a national decertification database, and training at Quantico, who are the ones that are “leading” the buffoons in Iraq, GTMO, and Afghanistan on “how to commit violations of the law without getting caught”? That’s right – your friends in the judicial branch – the contractors – the ones who used to be in law enforcement, but are not assigned to the prison system.

    * * *

    The public needs to make Congress prove everything. No longer can their verbal statements or promises be relied upon. They can’t, won’t, refuse to meet the 14th November 2005 deadline: Why believe anything else?

    If Congress wants to primes anything in the future about “other status reports,” they need to provide that agreement in writing, with some sort of meaningful sanction if they fail to meet that promise.

    It would be helpful if Congress would swear under oath that they are still in compliance with their oaths of office. The CEOs have to do that with their financials before the SEC; it seems Congress should be required to do the same with their “most important asset” – their word.

    If you’re not willing to back your promise up with something, your word means nothing.

    The fact that “Congress may not be able to agree on the status” should have been told, as promised, on the 14th of November.

    We have nothing.

    Fine: You’ll get nothing in return – no trust. Your problem. You solve it.

    * * *

    Let’s recall what Phase II is really about. It’s the second half of the Senate Intelligence Committee into Iraq-WMD-9-11 related intelligence issues that failed.

    Phase II was delayed because they didn’t want to have the result until “after the election.” Well, we still have elections, but we have no Phase II.

    Thank you for not doing your job.

    * * *

    We have a leadership problem. Nothing has been done. There is no plan to “figure out” what is going on. They have no “plan to get a plan.” Where’s the staff? No answers.

    We would reasonably assume that Phase II news is at odds with both parties.

    The real story is that all the information we have about 9-11 and WMD is most likely damaging to the public confidence in the RNC; but also the issue will be – what has the DNC done, or not done that they should have, to bring the real status to the public.

    It appears the White House was told the truth about Iraq and 9-11 and failed to act; Congress has unlawfully transferred power to the President; and the real problem was the Congress and Executive have jointly agreed to blame the intelligence community, while the real problem lies squarely with the RNC.

    The issue is: Where is the DNC, and what prevented the DNC from issuing an independent statement?

    Incompetent people, incapable of leadership, are self-evidently unfit to govern.

    * * *

    We can make some adverse inferences about 9-11, WMD, and the Senate investigation:

  • Fraud, corruption, conspiracy
  • Knowledge of crimes, aiding and abetting
  • Witness tampering
  • Bribery
  • Malfeasance
  • Unlawful acts: Violation of the laws of war, treaties, and Constitution
  • Violations of the oath of office

    More generalized adverse inference:

  • Unresponsive government
  • Unreliable political parties
  • Ineffectual staff, leadership
  • Incompetent
  • Indicators of criminal activity
  • Warrants increased audit, oversight, internal controls, checking
  • SAS 99 fraud indicators are flashing red
  • Can’t do something simple; no prospect can do something complicated
  • Unfit for leadership position or increased responsibility
  • Should retire, go away, and annoy their neighbors with stupidity

    * * *

    Despite all the jockeying around, the real issue is:

  • What happened in re 9-11, WMD, and Iraq?

  • Or, are we only going to “get information on status” after Attorney Fitzgerald completes his next Grand Jury review in 18 months?

  • Or are we saying that the Congress knows about deliberate delays by both the DNC and RNC and have jointly agreed to suppress everything about what is occurring on “national security grounds”?

    Please, tell us what could possibly be “nationally security related” in not providing information on the status of an investigation?

    All we needed was a smiley face: Happy face, or unhappy face.

    We got nothing; so we have to presume that there are whole scale violations of your oath of office.

    Without a credible remedy for violating your deadline, your words mean nothing.

    * * *

    We judge the information, if known, would be bad news. That the information on status could easily have been given.

    The Congress has also included in the statutes the requirement that the courts impose various sanctions for failing to meet deadlines.

    Congress should impose this standard on itself.

    * * *

    If Congress is not willing to meet a deadline, then Congress should be forced to pay for their own salaries until that deadline is met.

    That means: The money the public is currently paying that goes to all Congressional staff salaries should be put aside until Congress comes up with an answer; and all money allocated should pay for a special master to find out what is going on with Congress.

    * * *

    Who is taking advantage of our “freedoms”? Not the Iraqi insurgents – the Congress.

    * * *

    We need some real checks and balances. Time to check on Congress. Let’s have some legal powers so that the courts can mandate the congress and Executive agree to a deadline, or face jail time for their failure to respond to the court.

    * * *

    “Trust us” gave us Abu Ghraib, GTMO, and Eastern Europe.

    There’s no reason to trust Congress. Their promises, statements, plans, and leadership are worthless, unreliable, and incompetent.

    * * *

    It is time to begin exploring a more responsive approach without Congress’ input. They will not review the matters under their control; they should be denied an input to structural changes that would materially affect their power.

    It is time to consider a Constitutional Convention; and encourage member nations of the UN to vote against the US at the General Assembly: “What’s up with these deadlines, America?”

    * * *

    If Congress can’t meet a deadline, why should America be subject to deadlines under the Patriot Act?

    “Hay, we can’t talk about National Security letters” . . .but Congress is quick to provide no information on what it promises either.

    Why do American citizens have to put up with national security letters; but Congress feels it is free to ignore their promises to do something?

    If Congress wants to be believed, they need to subject themselves to the scrutiny of the Patriot Act, and let the public have free reign to call them before the court to find out what is going on.

    I hear the CIA is torturing people in Eastern Europe – is there a plan to get some answers from Congress using the same methods, or will the British Official Secrets Act be used as a shield to “not talk about” America’s Congress?

    * * *

    How many bribes are Congressional representatives getting to do nothing, not respond, not do what they primes, to lie, delay?

    * * *

    What’s a judicial solution:

  • What about a court, special master, or legal tool to find out what is going on in congress?

  • Why not present the information to a grand jury?

  • Why are we letting the Congress and Executive apparently write the rules, not respond, and then pretend nothing happened?

    * * *

    The idea of government is to promote the best leaders to effectively solve problems. These buffoons have abused their trust and do the opposite: They’re unfit for government. The checks and balances have failed. The system of internal controls and staffing has proven incapably defective in responding to a simple deadline.

    Both parties in government have failed in re Katrina and Iraq. Incompetence is not isolated to one party, class, branch, or person.

    The residents of Washington DC, Virginia and Maryland, who provide the labor to “keep Congress going,” have shown they have a defective educational system – are they unable to communicate?

    Self-evidently the citizens of Maryland and Virginia live in, continue to support, and materially fail in cleaning up this cess pool called the District of Columbia.

    * * *

    When leaders fail to do something, and we make adverse inferences, how are we going to lawfully remove them from office?

    There’s no reason to have any sympathy for them at all.

    District of Columbia: They are of no value, incompetent, unreliable, untrustworthy.

    The system of checks, balances, public oversight are ineffectual and meaningless.

    It is time to develop a parallel system and let the public decide which one is more effective, responsive, consistent with the Constitution.

    * * *

    The weather of late has not been conducive to effective government. Yet, we gone through for seasons without a change.

    * * *

    Which lobbyists have gotten in the way – how much money did they move from overseas countries to encourage inaction in Congress?

    * * *

    Encourage your friends to make adverse inference. We should have heard something. The 14 November 2005 deadlines has passed.

  • What is the status of the main investigation?

  • Why should we believe that anyone is actually looking at the original matters?

  • Who is the real point of contact, and why is there silence?

    * * *

    There was a big puff about a closed meeting. They called it a stunt. But here we are, despite the catalyst of that stunt and subsequent promise, we have no response.

    Does Congress, despite stunts, not respond?

    Other than it’s casual Constitutional reference, Congress does little other than create excuses, conduct cursory reviews and rubber stamp lobbyist budgets.

    Yet, there are alternatives that achieve the same objectives of the US Constitution.

    * * *

    Things must be really bad if both the RNC and DNC are unable to simply make a simple statement.

    What will the distraction be?

    Despite the stunt and agreement to make a peep on 14 November 2005, we sill have nothing. No information on status.

    It is reasonable to presume there is no progress being made on the original inquiry. We need a new crew under the US Attorney’s office to independently review the matter:

  • What Phase II issues are related to matters of criminal law?

  • Who were the Senators who were part of the White House-Senate agreement to stonewall the investigation into the Iraq-WMD-9-11 intelligence issues

  • What did the Senators and White House staff agree to in order to remain silent about the actual war crimes, threats, and other alleged unlawful acts in re Iraq, WMD, and 9-11?

    * * *

    Please make your excuses something better than, “Oh, we sent it in the mail, but it got lost.”

    Will Congress point at the public for daring to notice it is well past the 14th of November?

    * * *

    It remains to be understood what illusory promises were made in exchange for a requirement that nothing be done, but the burden fall on the public to clean up.

    * * *

    If the matter was “still under review” on the 14th of November, why didn’t you say that; and at least provide us with what you have?

    The promise was to provide the public with information.

    What is Congress solution to this? Voting themselves a pay raise.

    We have the illusions of promises and compliance, but nothing to show for it. This is real, the same charges against Saddam were fabricated. Why the “upsetness” over illusions, but the denial about reality.

    The news must be really bad.

    Hay, they’re talking about aliens, but the world hasn’t fallen apart. We can take it. Tell us the truth: Tell us nothing ahs been done, and the RNC is full of buffoons.

    We already knew that. But are you going to sit on this for another 10 months?

    * * *

    Million citizen march: Find out what is going on in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington DC.

    Or do you want 10 million?

    Or does America have to “not pay” their taxes to wake up Congress?

    Or, how quickly will the US bonds go into default if America stopped working for one month?

    I don’t see America’s banks getting upset. They can always renegotiate the terms.

    Who cares about their credit rating if they’ve got no prospect of having a stable American Congress that will find out facts?

    There may not be an America, much less a home or a country.

    May as well live in caves. People who live in caves don’t pay taxes. That means no money for Congress to play with. Then the lobbyists won’t bother to ask for what they can’t get: Money.

    But then again, aren’t we talking about “mandatory TV spots” for campaign advertising? The escalator will keep going, but to where: More non-sense from the RNC Congress.

    * * *

    Nasty things happened in the wake of Katrina. Now we see people fighting. What will happen if Americans are told about the Aliens?

    To find out that Star Wars was a training film for an intergalactic war between Earth.

    But what have those SETI people been listening to if the Aliens are out there, but we can’t hear them?

    Or is someone in the US government “fully aware of the Aliens communication systems” but they have neglected to tell us that they’ve been wasting money on SETI because SETI is part of some “really dark secret” related to a planet that has no core?

    * * *

    Americans should take note: The American government is incompetent.

    They do not deserve respect.

    They are idiots. They lie. They can’t do their job.

    They make up rules that allow them to legally violate standards of reporting that everyone is subject to.

    Then, they have the arrogance to lecture the world about made up things, all the while they can’t meet that standard.

    Then Americans wonder why people take up arms against them: Because you deny the world the peaceful method to effectively solve problems.

    Is this what Congress wants as a “resolution” to the failure to respond, as they promised, and provide a status of what is going on?

    The 14th Of November 2005 is an important date. America showed that it deserves to have no confidence; its leadership is challenged, not to be trusted, and should be second guessed.

    * * *

    A lack of explanation is not a presumption of guilt. But it sure makes one wonder about the non-sense coming out of DC: Do you really plan to impose that standard of accountability, law, and order on the world, but refuse to assent to that standard at home?

    Why not skip a day of work. Nobody will notice.

    Maybe the public will find a way to clean out your desk and start a new system in a new place.

    Where you’re not invited.

    * * *

    If you ever want to talk to someone who isn’t doing anything, just dial a random number in the 202 area code.

    Chances are you’ll find someone who’s lazy and stupid.

    Collect calls are best.