The Political Chase

House Rules Regarding Protests

CNN says “House rules bar demonstrations in the galleries.”

How do they define demonstration?

From the dictionary:

dem·on·stra·tion 
n.
1. The act of showing or making evident.
2. Conclusive evidence; proof.
3. An illustration or explanation, as of a theory or product, by exemplification or practical application.
4. A manifestation, as of one’s feelings.
5. A public display of group opinion, as by a rally or march: peace demonstrations.
 
ex·em·pli·fi·ca·tion 
n.
1. The act of exemplifying.
2. One that exemplifies; an example.
3. Law An officially certified copy of a document.

ex·em·pli·fy 
tr.v. ex·em·pli·fied, ex·em·pli·fy·ing, ex·em·pli·fies
1.
a. To illustrate by example: exemplify an argument.
b. To serve as an example of: scenes that exemplify the film director’s style.
2. Law To make a certified copy of (a document).

practical application - the act of bringing something to bear; using it for a particular purpose; "he advocated the application of statistics to the problem"; "a novel application of electronics to medical diagnosis"

man·i·fes·ta·tion 
n.
1.
a. The act of manifesting.
b. The state of being manifested.
2. An indication of the existence, reality, or presence of something: A high fever is an early manifestation of the disease.
3.
a. One of the forms in which someone or something, such as a person, a divine being, or an idea, is revealed.
b. The materialized form of a spirit.
4. A public demonstration, usually of a political nature.

man·i·fest 
adj.
Clearly apparent to the sight or understanding; obvious. See Synonyms at apparent.
tr.v. man·i·fest·ed, man·i·fest·ing, man·i·fests
1. To show or demonstrate plainly; reveal: "Mercedes … manifested the chaotic abandonment of hysteria" Jack London.
2. To be evidence of; prove.
3.
a. To record in a ship’s manifest.
b. To display or present a manifest of (cargo).
n.
1. A list of cargo or passengers carried on a ship or plane.
2. An invoice of goods carried on a truck or train.
3. A list of railroad cars according to owner and location.

Is Cindy Sheehan guilty?

Technorati Tags : Cindy+Sheehan, arrest, State+of+the+Union, politics, George+Bush

—–

More on Cindy Sheehan’s Arrest

Thanks to TPC reader Mil for more info on Cindy Sheehan’s arrest. This is an excerpt of Cindy Sheehan’s account, which is posted at Kos.

I had just sat down and I was warm from climbing 3 flights of stairs back up from the bathroom so I unzipped my jacket. I turned to the right to take my left arm out, when the same officer saw my shirt and yelled; “Protester.” He then ran over to me, hauled me out of my seat and roughly (with my hands behind my back) shoved me up the stairs. I said something like “I’m going, do you have to be so rough?” By the way, his name is Mike Weight.

The officer ran with me to the elevators yelling at everyone to move out of the way. When we got to the elevators, he cuffed me and took me outside to await a squad car. On the way out, someone behind me said, “That’s Cindy Sheehan.” At which point the officer who arrested me said: “Take these steps slowly.” I said, “You didn’t care about being careful when you were dragging me up the other steps.” He said, “That’s because you were protesting.” Wow, I get hauled out of the People’s House because I was, “Protesting.”

I was never told that I couldn’t wear that shirt into the Congress. I was never asked to take it off or zip my jacket back up. If I had been asked to do any of those things…I would have, and written about the suppression of my freedom of speech later. I was immediately, and roughly (I have the bruises and muscle spasms to prove it) hauled off and arrested for “unlawful conduct.”

I haven’t a clue what Sheehan is like or what her behavior norms are. That notwithstanding, I didn’t think she would be stupid enough to literally create civil unrest (audible or physically disrupting) in the gallery of the House. If improper, truly illegal behavior was part of her “chemistry,” it would have manifested well before the SOTU.

I believe Cindy’s account of last night. When I first heard of her arrest, I presumed Dubya or one of his lieutenants had her thrown out. She could have been adorned with the same attire as the First Lady and Dubya would not have tolerated her presence at his speech. She could have safely worn her shirt at the protest zone, a bazillion miles away from the Capitol, and what exactly would be productive about that?

Where in the United States Code is the statute specifying the required dress code at the State of the Union address. Yes, I’m sure clothing is required and there is a DC or federal statute covering (pun intended) that. Would a person be subject to arrest if wearing a T-shirt that said, Go Dubya, You the Man! or Yale Sucks? If a bright lawyer out there has the answer, let us know.

If Sheehan was orderly and not disruptive, she should file a complaint(s). The Supreme Court has previously ruled the President of the United States is not immune to civil suits. Ask Bill Clinton.

If Bush had an ounce of sense, he should have known arresting Sheehan would create more harm than good. But as we know, no one, except Harriet Miers, has publicly expressed brilliance on behalf of the president.

Acts of stupidity and vindictiveness abound us.

Libby’s Lawyers Seek Clarity

Scooter Libby’s lawyers are seeking evidence from the CIA and federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, on whether Valerie Plame Wilson held a formal classified status while employed with the CIA. Additionally, Libby’s advocates have requested the CIA’s assessment of damage (if any) suffered by outing Plame Wilson as a CIA agent.

Defense lawyers argued in court papers that it is crucial to determine whether Plame was not an undercover operative at the time Libby was discussing her with members of the media, and whether little or no damage was done to national security when her identity was publicly disclosed.

If either is true, the defense argued, it will “challenge the prosecution’s contention that Mr. Libby has reason to lie to the FBI and the grand jury about his conversations with reporters in July 2003.”

It seems to me that Libby’s lawyers are on a wild-goose chase or praying for an administrative error in the CIA’s records. First, I fail to believe that Fitzgerald would miss a significant detail, such as the actual classification of Wilson, before filing charges. But then again, Fitzgerald is not Superman and could have neglected ascertaining that information - still very unlikely.

Second, the amount of damage the CIA, it’s employees, operations, and employee’s relatives or friends may have or have not incurred is moot. Title 18 of the United States Code is not based upon the level of damage caused (or not) by releasing classified information. It is very clear. You cannot disseminate classified information, period. And, it doesn’t differentiate whether you are a very busy (or not) employee of the government. Libby’s lawyers contend he was overwhelmed with classified information and therefore he might not remember certain information about Wilson. Hello, that doesn’t fly either. Libby was academically and professionally well trained for his role, and compensated accordingly. Furthermore he willingly signed form SF-312, therefore he accepted the responsibility and accountability of his specific job. A case of poor job performance will not fly either. If Libby was a poor performer, the Veep should have fired him before any recklesss endangerment occurred.

Third, Libby is charged with obstruction of justice, perjury, and making false statements. If he lied about his grandmother baking apple pies, that is illegal. Plame Wilson’s classification or even employment is not part of the argument.

What are Libby’s high-priced lawyers up too? That requires more reflection.

Sheehan Busted

If the press reports press reports are accurate, Cindy Sheehan needs to get her act together. Being arrested for her attire is stupidity at best; discriminatory and violating her civil rights at worst. Whatever the case may be, she will get absolutely no where by acting uncivil in the gallery of the House of Representatives, and much worse by giving the appearance of being a cohort of Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez.

Technorati Tags : Cindy+Sheehan, state+of+the+union, protest, politics, Iraq

A Better State of the Union

The president’s State of the Union (HTML PDF) speech last night was worthless and at one point, down right embarrassing. Select any speech the president has given on the war on terror over the past three years and you will find the same message that was delivered last night. Beating the drum of fear and a continued absence of justification and strategy.

By now, I am sure everyone is aware of the response the president received when he brought up his defunct Social Security plan. It was as if the well of the House of Representatives was an active Parliament session in Great Britain or Australia. When the president noted his plan failed last year, the response from the Democrats was mockery, cachinnation and a standing ovation. Clearly a house divided and polarized.

The president dedicated a significant amount of time to his extreme right wing base. He delivered meaningless, non-productive rhetoric — greasing the squeaky wheel — rather than address the salient issues facing America today. To the point, instead of schmoozing the neo-cons with babble, he could have focused on the Gulf Coast recovery. Instead Bush devoted only six worthless sentences to the absolute obliteration of a major American city, New Orleans, and many other regional communities.

Bottom line on Bush — boring, more of the same but with less punch, nothing notable new, multiple points of fabrication and selective memory.

Continue reading ‘A Better State of the Union’

Trouble Brews In Iran

In November, we discussed the significance of Iran, especially as it relates to the war in Iraq — Iran is the winner. ABC is reporting that Iran has begun preparations for nuclear enrichment and refuses to answer significant IAEA questions.

The United Nations (UN) nuclear watchdog has confirmed Iran has begun preparing for nuclear enrichment, which can make fuel for bombs, and continues to hinder a probe of unanswered questions about Iran’s atomic aims.

In a confidential report to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) 35-nation board of governors, the agency says Iran has not yet begun uranium enrichment itself but has started renovation work at its Natanz enrichment site.

“Substantial renovation of the gas handling system is underway at the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP) at Natanz,” the report said, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters.

Iran has said it will begin small-scale enrichment and the IAEA said earlier this month that Iran had broken UN seals on atomic equipment.

[...]Tehran refuses to let the IAEA question a key scientist linked to the buying attempts for a site…Washington and its allies say that military involvement in Irans nuclear program is evidence that Tehran is seeking atomic weapons.

There is no doubt that a state sponsored and developed nuclear weapon aimed at America or its allies is the greatest problem we face. So, now we are reaping the benefits of the president’s deployment of democracy in the Middle East — a rogue state, with a duly elected democratic government, making nukes. Nuclear weapons are a far cry from rose petals and Hamas, democratically elected in Palestine, is not greeting us or Israel with open arms. The Middle East is far more a national security issue today than it was prior to the war in Iraq and not even remotely close to the president’s prognostication and promises in 2003.

The Commander-in-Chief devoted one paragraph in the State of the Union speech, to what may be the greatest threat we face today.

Iran, a nation now held hostage by a small clerical elite that is isolating and repressing its people. The regime in that country sponsors terrorists in the Palestinian territories and in Lebanon — and that must come to an end. The Iranian government is defying the world with its nuclear ambitions — and the nations of the world must not permit the Iranian regime to gain nuclear weapons. America will continue to rally the world to confront these threats. And tonight, let me speak directly to the citizens of Iran: America respects you, and we respect your country. We respect your right to choose your own future and win your own freedom. And our Nation hopes one day to be the closest of friends with a free and democratic Iran.

Feeling warm and fuzzy now? As the Governor of Virginia said in the Democratic response tonight. Americans are looking for results. Yeah, we are seeing results, but it isn’t exactly what was on the wish list.

Technorati Tags : Iran, nuclear, enrichment, politics, George+Bush, Iraq

The Speech

The only statement the president made that is noteworthy:

“Before history is written down in books, it is written in courage.”

More to come, but that’s the extent of leadership rhetoric. 

Text of President Bush’s Speech

This page has moved. Click here for the correct page.

State of the Union 2006

January 31, 2006

STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT
United States Capitol
Washington, D.C.

9:12 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. Mr. Speaker, Vice President Cheney, members of Congress, members of the Supreme Court and diplomatic corps, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens: Today our nation lost a beloved, graceful, courageous woman who called America to its founding ideals and carried on a noble dream. Tonight we are comforted by the hope of a glad reunion with the husband who was taken so long ago, and we are grateful for the good life of Coretta Scott King. (Applause.)

Every time I’m invited to this rostrum, I’m humbled by the privilege, and mindful of the history we’ve seen together. We have gathered under this Capitol dome in moments of national mourning and national achievement. We have served America through one of the most consequential periods of our history — and it has been my honor to serve with you.

In a system of two parties, two chambers, and two elected branches, there will always be differences and debate. But even tough debates can be conducted in a civil tone, and our differences cannot be allowed to harden into anger. To confront the great issues before us, we must act in a spirit of goodwill and respect for one another — and I will do my part. Tonight the state of our Union is strong — and together we will make it stronger. (Applause.)

In this decisive year, you and I will make choices that determine both the future and the character of our country. We will choose to act confidently in pursuing the enemies of freedom — or retreat from our duties in the hope of an easier life. We will choose to build our prosperity by leading the world economy — or shut ourselves off from trade and opportunity. In a complex and challenging time, the road of isolationism and protectionism may seem broad and inviting — yet it ends in danger and decline. The only way to protect our people, the only way to secure the peace, the only way to control our destiny is by our leadership — so the United States of America will continue to lead. (Applause.)

Abroad, our nation is committed to an historic, long-term goal — we seek the end of tyranny in our world. Some dismiss that goal as misguided idealism. In reality, the future security of America depends on it. On September the 11th, 2001, we found that problems originating in a failed and oppressive state 7,000 miles away could bring murder and destruction to our country. Dictatorships shelter terrorists, and feed resentment and radicalism, and seek weapons of mass destruction. Democracies replace resentment with hope, respect the rights of their citizens and their neighbors, and join the fight against terror. Every step toward freedom in the world makes our country safer — so we will act boldly in freedom’s cause. (Applause.)

Far from being a hopeless dream, the advance of freedom is the great story of our time. In 1945, there were about two dozen lonely democracies in the world. Today, there are 122. And we’re writing a new chapter in the story of self-government — with women lining up to vote in Afghanistan, and millions of Iraqis marking their liberty with purple ink, and men and women from Lebanon to Egypt debating the rights of individuals and the necessity of freedom. At the start of 2006, more than half the people of our world live in democratic nations. And we do not forget the other half — in places like Syria and Burma, Zimbabwe, North Korea, and Iran — because the demands of justice, and the peace of this world, require their freedom, as well. (Applause.)

No one can deny the success of freedom, but some men rage and fight against it. And one of the main sources of reaction and opposition is radical Islam — the perversion by a few of a noble faith into an ideology of terror and death. Terrorists like bin Laden are serious about mass murder — and all of us must take their declared intentions seriously. They seek to impose a heartless system of totalitarian control throughout the Middle East, and arm themselves with weapons of mass murder.

Their aim is to seize power in Iraq, and use it as a safe haven to launch attacks against America and the world. Lacking the military strength to challenge us directly, the terrorists have chosen the weapon of fear. When they murder children at a school in Beslan, or blow up commuters in London, or behead a bound captive, the terrorists hope these horrors will break our will, allowing the violent to inherit the Earth. But they have miscalculated: We love our freedom, and we will fight to keep it. (Applause.)

Continue reading ‘State of the Union 2006′

Wes Clark’s Version

Yesterday, Wes Clark delivered his version of the State of the Union to The New America Foundation. Click here to download the speech in PDF format.