House Leadership Investigation: Failure of American Governance

As you review the events surrounding the House Leadership investigation, recall there are other governments observing the US Government responses.

Keep in mind the credible lines of inquiry other governments have publicly engaged/ Notice the Contrast between what the American government asserts as a principle in Iraq, vs. what it practices at home.

* * *

Europe has a different approach to legal issues: It faces them. The American government under this House leadership has done the opposite burying "trivial" matters like abuse against Pages, and doing nothing about mounting war crimes evidence. This is recklessness.

Notice the clear problem statement, and compare it with the nebulous approach the Americans take: They do not put into writing the problem statement; they're still fumbling with what they're trying to do. Notice the inconsistent statements by the House leadership: This is a sign that they are still trying to spin whether the issue is or is not broad, not to mention to major problem of what actually happened.

Notice there is a plan: Full with documentation, resolution, and consideration for what the facts are. Contrast this with the Miltary Commissions Bill, full of propaganda and excuses to justify ignoring Geneva and engaging in illegal abuse.

Notice the ongoing nature of the EU report. This is not a final report, but a public status report. Contrast that with the secret nature the House takes to similar issues of governance. We can learn more about American House Leadership misconduct by reading the reports from the European Union: The laws have been ignored, and the House leadership has failed to prevent these abuses. These are war crimes.

Notice the timeliness of the information. It is not final, but a status review. Contrast that with the House approach of waiting until the end, then issuing a worthless report, well after the public might use the report, as was done with the Iraq WMD report.

Notice the succinct statements of facts and problems. Then contrast this with the American approach: Confusion, obfuscation, and no concern for lawful solutions.

Americans have to decide whether they want a change, or whether they want more of the same. There are plenty of examples of far more effective governance. We only need to look at what the Europeans have done to explore the issues. The United States has the evidence and engaged in the illegal activity, but would have us believe the crimes were committed by someone else. Many in America's government knew there was a problem, but chose to do nothing. Their excuses are not defenses, but admissible as to what they knew, but failed to do as required.

Notice the EU states its concerns relative to the law and its legal obligations: To ensure all governments meet their obligations. Where is this concern in Congress? Nowhere, the only concern is with hiding problems, not solving problems. The problem rests with both sides of the aisle. We need solutions, not finger pointing. If this American leadership is not willing to provide that leadership, we can either find new leaders, or we can find a new government structure that supports what is required: Prudent management of government operations within the Rule of Law.

What's the plan of the US Congress to modernize its investigations, and ensure the review of the House Leadership addresses the international obligations of Geneva: To ensure that Violations of Geneva are investigated, prevented, and prosecuted? The EU is already implementing its plan, and the war crimes prosecutors are watching closely how the US leadership does or doe snot effectively conduct an investigation to a "trivial" matter like Pages; the results will speak volumes about whether it is believable the US is interesting in similarly complying with "more difficult" requirements of Geneva, which Hamdan said were requirements. The world knows if the US cannot do simple things, it cannot be expected to do more complicated things like comply with, enforce, and prosecute violations of Geneva.

Notice the desire to find answers; America's approach has been to avoid asking the question, at worst actively targeting those who dare to point out what the world knows -- The US has engaged in grave reaches of Geneva and this House leadership has been complicit with failing to prevent that illegal conduct, much less investigate the facts.

Notice the interest in effectively managing resources; the US approach in Iraq, Katrina, and after 9-11 has been to squander resources without adjustment. Only the House Leadership can approve the Appropriations Bill; the Senate cannot take the blame for illegal expenditures -- it jointly shares the blame for failing to review the issues as well. We need only look to our neighbors to the north to discover they too have concerns with American governance: America is an outlaw nation in their eyes.

Recall the language of the Military Commissions Bill -- the US Congress voted to ignore international law. This is illegal. Other nations have a say when the US defies the law, its obligations, and remains an expanding threat to other nations.

Americans must decide whether you are serious about believing your leadership, or siding with the world actors who view American leaders skeptically.

The world knows what needs to be done: The American leadership must meet its international obligations. The wrong answer is to permit another distraction, as we have seen with Iraq. The correct answer is to put the attention where it is needed: On the American leadership.

This Congress will not accept blame for war crimes. Rather, international actors will have to impose this Rule of Law. Each of the Members of Congress involved in this investigation are complicit, and not objective; to admit to failing anywhere, is an admission they have failed on the larger issues of Geneva, FISA violations, prisoner abuse, and illegal war crimes in Iraq.

American voters will have to decide when is the appropriate time to seek international assistance. This Congress has shown since 2001 it is incapable of effective governance, much less complying with "simple" Geneva requirements. It even defies the Supreme Court. It is nothing to them to defy the voters and other nations.

There is an answer. The State Attorney Generals have the power to prosecute federal officials who refuse to ensure the State Guarantee to a Constitutional System.

What You Can Do

Don't wait. Contact your State Attorney General. Encourage them to bring indictments against Members of Congress for their failure to protect the American Constitution. The DoJ Staff and US Attorneys are complicit. The State Attorney Generals should work with international war crimes prosecutors, share evidence, and ensure the American Constitution is protected. This must be done within the Article III courts. If the American government and State attorney Generals refuse to assert their oath, they too could be subject to prosecution of war crimes.

If America is not willing to assert the rule of law in court, nor assent to international legal obligations, foreign fighters have no other option but to continue to wage war on the other forum which this House leadership prefers: The battlefield.

American House leaders have failed to raise an Army under Article 1 Section 8, and have demonstrated incompetence in managing this war, as they have the power to do.

It would be preferable if these issues were resolved within the court, at the state level, or by prosecutors. Americans must choose whether you prefer the Rule of Law that you have arrogantly imposed on others, but do not practice at home; or whether you want to suffer continued combat losses abroad. If the American House leadership fails to comprehend their war crimes, and foreign combat losses are insufficient, foreign fighters are fully prepared to exercise their lawful rights under Geneva to bring this illegal war to America's heartland.

This is not a threat. Rather, it is the reality when the House leadership refuses to assent to the rule of law. The world no longer has compassion or patience. They have endured outrages because this House leadership in both parties has failed.

Americans must choose whether you will challenge by your reckless leadership, or face lawful retaliation on the battlefield. Your combat forces may be powerful, but they are thin, stretched, and limited. You are also outnumbered.

It would be preferable if this might be resolved peacefully through prudent leadership in the House and acceptance that the House Leadership problem is much wider. Americans must choose whether you resolve this issue at home, or have the solution imposed on you from without. Either way, it is no longer acceptable what this House leadership has done; and it is no longer a requirement that anyone continue to assent to their abuse of power, most of all American citizens.

* * *

Where This Is Going

Feeling overwhelmed? For your convenience, there is an archive of how this information fits together.