Friday, August 31, 2007


New York, New York--No, this didn't happen because the Bush administration is in-trouble, not-at-all. They wouldn't do something illegal, would they? It appears that we've finally found those New York City. Small wonder the 9/11 hijackers hit the Big Apple: they wanted their goddamned nerve agents back. Those pesky Saudis, I tell ya.' One thing's certain: if they were nerve agents "from Iraq," they were likely made in the USA, or created with our assistance during the Iran-Iraq war (1982-1988). Ah, that Ronald Reagan and Donald Rumsfeld. They're the gifts that keep on giving! Oceania has always been at war with EastAsia, note that one. Desperate people do desperate things when they're cornered. We're beginning to see this behavior in such acts. Prediction: we will never know the real identities of who placed these vials at the U.N.'s offices. Nobody genuine will ever be "caught." I wonder if SAIC is involved? They're known to handle toxins, maybe even polonium-210.


Washington D.C.
--As the saying goes: "Washington D.C. is Hollywood for ugly people." Words were never truer when applied to Fred Thompson, former GOP mole on the Watergate committee, and lousy actor, as well as philanderer. No, there's no-connection at all, none.

It appears
Tim Griffin is busy-at-work with his boss/mentor, Karl Rove, working to get the long-shot candidate elected.

Question: will they be able to steal the elections again by barring Black Americans from the polls? If not, they're not going to be winning. Journalists and other researchers had better start looking-into what
SAIC's contributions to the Thompson campaign might be--one could expect very questionable donations, but since the FEC is controlled by the Bush administration, they have a good-shot. A shame that the oath of office means nothing anymore (if it ever did). Why would the GOP do this? They've never done this before, have they?

Two-words: John McCain (who's part of the game this time!). Perverse doesn't even cover it.

Wednesday, August 29, 2007


Washington D.C.--Hey kids, don't try this at home or the White House, and definitely not on the cars of any Republican incumbents: the best way is to get a potato, a broom, and place the potato into the end of the tail-pipe. Now, take the broom and ram that potato as far into the hypothetical tail-pipe as you can. Next, take your mom's car-keys, and make the deepest-scratches you can into the hypothetical, imaginary car. Also, those imaginary tires are easily flattened, just pick a good, sharp-object and slam it into the tire with a lot of blunt force. Sugar or sand in the gas tank of any imaginary automobile also has a very interesting effect. And never, ever shadow or follow Mr. Rove and his associates you've identified through research. Do not tail them everywhere they go, making their lives unpleasant, as though they were living in a human fishbowl...
[Ed., 09.01.2007-In what can only be described as a 'Jungian-coincidence,' the author had the exact same model of Jaguar pull out in-front of his vehicle just yesterday on his way to see 'Halloween.' It was a boss at a nearby factory coming-back from lunch. Amazing.]

You didn't ask for it, but you're getting it: Baby Zofia!

South Bend, Indiana--Here's an older photo of my niece, little baby Zofia (we had no-choice in the spelling of her name, I would have used an "S"). This is the first-time Baby Z played drums ever! She was just one, now she's two.

I didn't and still don't care about the death of my father's mother, who could best be described as an undiagnosed psychotic. Conversely, when my grandmother and grandfather died (my mother's parents), it was devastating to my family and still is. Family is family, and not purely by blood, but also through behavior. Cruelty has its price: alienation. "Lil" had no friends left before her final descent into madness and dementia, and she earned it.

But this baby is the best consolation we could ever have for those we have loved and lost, and she looks so much like a Blough--like my mother and brother especially--that it's uncanny. Babies are such a joyous occasion, the good-side of life, and her coming helped me understand that life goes on and that mortality is necessary. She's the sweetest little baby I've ever had the honor to know, and this blog is my humble contribution towards making a better world for her to live in. Getting your hands dirty is part of the job, and there's a lot of work to do. How do we begin making a better world?

A first-step means taxing the ultra-rich out-of-existence and ending the legal existence of corporations. It's our world too, including Zofia's.

All I can think of is this baby's smile and her giggles. A natural musician? We'll see, it runs on my mother's side of the family! My great-grandmother played barrel house and juke-joint piano, ragtime, etc., like a charm. And girls can play drums now, it's safe to come out! We're all going to live together or die together, and babies are why we must have peace in this world, forget the adults.

Revised 10.13.2008

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Senator Larry E. Craig: "I am not gay."

Castro District, San Francisco/Washington D.C.--And neither was Liberace or Rock Hudson, dearie, and neither is Rupaul. Melissa Etheridge isn't, and Ellen DeGeneres is straight, she's not living with Portia DiRossi. Sen. Craig, they're laughing at you in the Castro District tonight, and every gay community in America...and everywhere else. Vice cops belittling the untimely death of Judy Garland sparked the three-day riots at Stonewall during that hot Summer of 1969 (fuck you Bryan Adams) in NYC. Craig will spark riotous-laughter. Larry, I love and accept you as a gay man, just not as the crypto-fascist nutjob you really are. I hope this detroys your political career and the margin of the GOP in Congress. I'd say you'r a hypocrite for wanting to pass a ban on gay marriage, but that's too obvious. But then, so are you, and you're busted. It's over, and it's time to finally be a man.


“At the time of this incident, I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my actions. I was not involved in any inappropriate conduct. I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have ple[a]d guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously.” --GOP Sen. Larry E. Craig, 08.27.2007 (Boise Weekly).

Minneapolis, Minnesota--Of course, as we all know, this is the fault of Bill Clinton and the Democratic Party. Unknown to most Americans is an ultra-secret program created by the DNC (or by SAIC?) that makes Republican incumbents lose control of their sexual-impulses in every regard. Resignation--it seems--is the only relief these poor souls can find in such a manipulated and highly-agitated state (Minnesooooota) of sexual arousal. It's unclear whether the program utilizes microwaves or ultrasonic waves, but it's said that the victims often experience delusions of adequacy and competence where there is none.

What's interesting is that this story was covered-up. It's the same treatment that the well-heeled clients of Deborah Jeane Palfrey have enjoyed (and are still enjoying thanks to a docile media), in a way that's similar to the cover-ups and obstructing that Sen. David Vitter once enjoyed in New Orleans and Washington D.C. thanks to the Justice Department under the Bush administration (and possibly the Clinton administration as well). It could be that we're finally receiving confirmation on this story because those protecting these politicians engaged in surreptitious sexual behavior are beginning to fall, and in increasing numbers.
Another possibility to add to this mix is that Karl Rove is at it again with his submerged electoral tactics, and likely wants to aid Fred Thompson through his protege Tim Griffin (via "dirty tricks"). It's not improbable that we're hearing about this story due to Alberto Gonzales's abrupt and belated resignation yesterday. Getting-laid with an adult male in an airport restroom in Minnesota appears to be a top-priority of Craig's:

The officer said he was staking out the bathroom at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport after complaints about homosexual activity. He said Craig sat down in the adjacent stall and put his bag against the stall door. He then tapped his right foot. "I recognized this as a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct," the officer wrote. "The presence of others [in the bathroom] did not seem to deter Craig as he moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot which was within my stall area," the report states. (New York Post, 08.27.2007)

Maybe the Senator wasn't getting at home what he really needed and craved--sex with a man. This is getting predictable and tiresome. He's married. So what? Does it make sense that he backed an amendment that would have banned gay marriage? Yes. I'd say the term "gay marriage" would describe his situation in many respects, but why do these individuals think that if they crow loudest against something that they won't be noticed? Mark Foley was a big advocate for protecting children, while he was approaching them for sex on Capitol Hill. Surely, then, they want these laws to control their behavior in what could be viewed as a classic case of psychological "projection" of what one is "guilty" of.

The original incident happened on June 11th in a restroom stall at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. I've been to this airport, and one would have to go out of their way to get into the trouble Senator Craig is now finding himself in. The media should get-to-the-bottom of why we're learning about this now, though again, it's likely that the Justice Department and local authorities quashed it as long as they could under pressure. Release of the story at this historical moment seems timed for some impact, and eyes should be focused on Tim Griffin and Karl Rove. But the fact known today is that Craig pleaded guilty and is on-probation for his behavior of trying to solicit sex with an undercover police officer named Sgt. Dave Karsnia in an airport restroom. Who sat on the story? Who kept the records away from the media? Why is it being released now? Who leaked it? Is Sgt. Karsnia attractive? It bears all the MO of Rove and his associates.

We're also beginning to hear about an August 8th hearing, so that's probably when some of the mainstream media began to know about this, or shortly thereafter. Remember when the New York Times sat on the warrantless surveillance story until well-after the 2004 elections? They might want to tell us exactly why they did this, but we do know for-a-fact that the Bush administration told them they "would have blood on their hands."

Threats and the use of fear as a weapon appear to have been very useful for the White House since 9/11. Apparently they never heard or read FDR's comments on the emotion. Compliantly, the New York Times sat on the warrantless surveillance story for almost an entire year after George W. Bush had been safely reelected--but it also took the GOP stealing the elections again, partly through voter "caging-lists." This was courtesy--in-part--of the Gonzales Justice Department looking the other way, and through political operatives like J. Timothy Griffin coordinating the illegal activities in several states. A very ugly picture is beginning to emerge, and history will not be kind in its judgement.

Griffin now serves (or does he?) on Fred Thompson's presidential campaign team. Again, it begs-the-question whether Karl Rove is behind the release of this information in some way, since it will certainly do some harm to Mitt Romney's campaign. The Giuliani campaign has been facing similar embarrassments. How much harm has been done to both campaigns is an unknown at this time. The other potential factor in all of this is an unspoken system of cover-up for whoever happens to be in-power. This writer would wager that it's bipartisan in many areas, but falls predominantly on the GOP-side as they are currently holding power. Who was it that obstructed justice who isn't currently in the right place(s )to do so anymore? Why did the story break? Why now? Obviously, the Senator couldn't wait to have sex, and it wasn't a matter of "wait until I get home."

In the Senate, Mr. Craig, who is married and has three children [Ed.-Not his, but his wife's from a previous marriage], is known for his advocacy for the rights of gun owners and has a close association with the National Rifle Association. When Republicans controlled the Senate in the last Congress, Mr. Craig was chairman of the Veterans Affairs Committee. He is a former member of the party’s Senate leadership. He represented Idaho in the House before first winning election to an open Senate seat in 1990 and he was easily re-elected in 1996 and 2002. In 2006, Mr. Craig publicly rejected allegations by a gay rights advocate that he had engaged in a homosexual behavior, calling them “completely ridiculous.” (New York Times, 08.27.2007)

Yes, how ridiculous, how absurd it is to have to deny who one really is simply to get elected, but that's America. If this doesn't clue most of the public to the fact that political and economic elites don't have problems with homosexuality--merely using it to divide the rest of us in America--they'll never get it, or anything else. It's an obvious lesson, and the GOP's leadership will do as much as they can to downplay any of these lessons since it's one of the few methods they've had left to get into office...besides barring Black Americans from voting, a high crime. Blacks haven't traditionally voted Republican for several generations, they vote predominantly Democratic.

But back to Larry E. Craig and his peers in the GOP: besides lacking any sexual control, it appears many Republican incumbents have little-or-no respect for the rule of law. No, it's not just the president. People do these things when someone (the president? the former AG?) has given them the indication that they can do it with impunity, and they hold most of the power in Washington and elsewhere. It's something that's unspoken in the corridors of power. Somehow, these GOP incumbents forgot that they lost the 2006 midterms and that many of their protectors were gone (except within the mainstream media).

It's important to examine elements of Craig's statement released today: ..."I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have plead guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously." Right, you thought that just by being a U.S. Senator that it would go-away, that you didn't need a lawyer. As we all know today, Craig was wrong. He was observed and arrested by an honest policeman. The statement of the arresting officer corroborates Craig's callous attitude towards the law.

...Craig kept asking what was going to happen. ...Once outside the restroom, Craig stopped near the entrance and was hesitant to comply. I told Craig that we would speak in a private area without embarrassing him or causing a disturbance. Craig was still hesitant to follow me at first, but then complied. ...Craig handed me a business card that identified himself as a United States Senator as he stated, "What do you think about that?" I responded by setting his business card down on the table and again asking him for his driver's license. (, original arrest statement, filed 06.26.2007)

Said perpetrator plead guilty because he was caught. That's it. There's nothing complicated about it. He's on unsupervised probation until the Summer of 2008. For that reason alone, it's unlikely that Larry E. Craig is going to be running for reelection anytime soon, and that his seat is going to taken by a Democrat in the most conservative state in the Union, Idaho. In addition to this, Craig has already resigned from his post on Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. None of this is of any real concern to someone like Karl Rove or those who he serves. Romney is a long-shot. It's likely that someone wishes only to give Fred Thompson a more level playing-field in 2008. The press should be shadowing Karl Rove and his operatives all-the-time, this could be another one of their jobs.

The original police report from 06.26.2007 (why the lag?):

The New York Times yesterday:

NY POST (thanks for once, Rupert), wit' da' most, 08.27.2007:

Tim Griffin's e-mails to Monica Goodling from the House Judiciary Committee:

Monday, August 27, 2007

The Masthead was never truer than today!

J-7's sitemeter--Check-it-out, and you'll see a cluster of hits from 'Potomac, Maryland,' or the DOJ. Note the search, and note what they read when they were here. Also, a tin-teardrop. Don't forget to get eggs-and-milk on your way home either. My advice to all Bush/Gonzales appointments at Justice, and throughout the federal bureaucracy: resign now.


"We anticipate that many of our graduates are going to go and be change agents in society."
--Regent School of Law Dean, Jeffrey Brauch to the Boston Globe (04.08.2007)

Washington D.C.--While it's beyond the scope of this blog to fully-investigate this--something that only Congress can truly find-out--there could be connections between "Hookergate" and the U.S. Attorney firing scandal, and they could be legion. Take former senior counsel to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Monica Goodling: she's now 33, but was in her late-twenties when she was tapped for Justice by...who?

That would be Alberto Gonzales, who answers to the president. Goodling--a graduate of lowest-tiered Regent School of Law--hired ex-U.S. Attorney (not fired) Tim Griffin in what could be a widespread game of appointment-leapfrog, and helped draw-up a list of prosecutors to fire. There is ample-evidence at this time to believe they were fired for political reasons. According to an April Boston Globe article on Regent, there is ample-evidence the Bush administration hires-and-fires for political reasons. Hey, that's fair:
But even in its darker days, Regent has had no better friend than the Bush administration. Graduates of the law school have been among the most influential of the more than 150 Regent University alumni hired to federal government positions since President Bush took office in 2001, according to a university website. One of those graduates is Monica Goodling , the former top aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales who is at the center of the storm over the firing of US attorneys. Goodling, who resigned on Friday, has become the face of Regent overnight -- and drawn a harsh spotlight to the administration's hiring of officials educated at smaller, conservative schools with sometimes marginal academic reputations. (Boston Globe, 04.08.2007)
Hey, the president didn't have good grades either. He must have a soft-spot (his head) for them. It would seem it's the Bush administration and their appointments, once ensconced within the bureaucracy, who decide on the hiring now.

How widespread is this?
Is it politically-based? It appears it could very well be. There have been rumblings about this for months-and-months, but we got an earful around May 7th regarding the Justice Department probe:

"We are highly disturbed by the emerging information, because it seems to repeat this pattern going on at the [Department of Justice] where people are chosen for their positions not for their experience and qualifications, but rather whether or not they match a certain political ideology," Sanchez said. Among those raising concerns is Joseph Rich, a 36-year veteran of the department, who left in 2005 after serving as head of the Civil Rights Division's section that deals with voting rights. "The whole hiring process had been changed to put the decision-making in political appointees' hands, and it was clear it was being politicized in that manner," Rich told CNN. (CNN, 05.07.2007)
Tim Griffin could tell us more about the problems at the Civil Rights Division. But is it just at Justice? This is the connection to Deborah Jeane Palfrey and her case. Palfrey's impressions of the postal agents who contacted her realtor on October 3rd of 2006 appeared to be in their "late-twenties."

Her mother Blanche was visited at her home in Florida on June 5th of this year by IRS agent Troy Burrus...and one of the postal investigators, Maria Couvillon [Ed.-Quite possibly the daughter of federal district court judge Irvin Couvillon who works out of Louisiana]. Her mother had the same impression, and Palfrey adds, " mother thought the “kids” appeared to be very young."

Is it a strange question to ask: are hiring practices throughout the rest of our government bureaucracy are the same as they are at Justice (under the Bush administration)? This is an administration that has made-it-plain that they're at war with the departments of our government--could politically-based hiring be of any surprise after warrantless wiretapping?

It's being alleged that Bradley Schlozman (former top official in the Civil Rights Division of Justice) had the party-affiliation of Ty Clevenger (a Republican) removed from his application for employment at the department. Again, the public isn't allowed to know these details under federal law, based on protecting investigative procedures and privacy. The public isn't allowed access to this information.

Is standard procedure a legitimate front (highlighted by legal counsel like Harriet Miers, or even someone like Goodling?), something that the Bush administration was counting on? What's strange is the multi-jurisdictional quality of Palfrey's case, it seems confused: the USPS, the Justice Department, and the IRS (more?). There could be other departments involved, but the question is: why? Was authorizing the use of postal investigators a way to federalize the case? Could the same be said about the involvement of the IRS? Is this how "Hookergate" began:
Lawmakers from both parties yesterday called for limits on antiterrorism laws in response to a Justice Department report that the FBI improperly obtained telephone logs, banking records and other personal information on thousands of Americans." It also found that the FBI had hatched an agreement with telephone companies allowing the agency to ask for information on more than 3,000 phone numbers -- often without a subpoena, without an emergency or even without an investigative case. (Washington Post, 03.10.2007)
This sounds very familiar, and might cover the predicament that Ms. Palfrey has found herself in. Were antiterrorism laws used--and abused--in her case? Many in Congress have been calling for a rollback on statutes within the Patriot Act. We could be finding-out soon whether Deborah Jeane Palfrey was caught-up in this net, but this aspect can only be covered by Congress--or by whistle-blowers.

Ed.-Minor revisions added 08.27.2007. FOIAs were filed in July of this year by J-7 on all members of the investigation and prosecution team at Justice involved in the case of Ms. Palfrey. They are pending, but could aid in substantiating if others at DOJ were hired for ideological reasons. [Ed., 08.28.2008--The FOIAs were laughable with no detail on the prosecutors' backgrounds, merely their loyalty oaths.]

The 'Boss' (Gonzales) Quits, and the Underlings Start Shitting: DOJ Revisits J-7

-7--Heh-heh-heh. The google search was for William R. Cowden, assistant U.S. attorney in-charge of the prosecution of one Deborah Jeane Palfrey. They must be nervous about their jobs, as well as potential-and-upcoming legal problems for many of them. They might consider following their "boss" out the door.

Don't let it hit you on the way out, assholes, especially you twats from
Regents School of Law. We got em' now Bubba! I wonder who's upholding the law while these turds cover their asses?
Take your "unitary executive theory" and shove it. You're the enemy within, the real fifth columnists.

Domain Name ? (U.S. Government)
IP Address
149.101.1.# (US Dept of Justice)
US Dept of Justice
Continent: North America
United States (Facts)
State: Maryland
City: Potomac
Lat/Long: 39.023, -77.1993
English (U.S.) en-us
Operating System
Microsoft WinXP
Internet Explorer 6.0Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; DI60SP1001)
version 1.3
Monitor Resolution: 1024 x 768
Color Depth: 16 bits
Time of Visit
Aug 28 2007 2:55:53 am
Last Page View
Aug 28 2007 2:55:53 am
Visit Length
0 seconds
Page Views
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page
Visit Exit Page
Out Click
Time Zone
Visitor's Time
Aug 27 2007 2:55:53 pm
Visit Number


"Mr. Rove acted as if he was above the law. That is wrong... Now that he is leaving the White House while under subpoena, I continue to ask what Mr. Rove and others at the White House are so desperate to hide. Mr. Rove's apparent attempts to manipulate elections and push out prosecutors citing bogus claims of voter fraud shows corruption of federal law enforcement for partisan political purposes, and the Senate Judiciary Committee will continue its investigation into this serious issue." --Senate Judiciary Chair Sen. Patrick Leahy

Washington D.C.--Can't you hear the cries of anguish in the Hispanic communities of America? Me neither. Remember those huge parades that the Hispanic community had when he was appointed? Me neither. Like Black Americans with Colin Powell in the 1990s, this writer would wager that not many Hispanic people knew who this individual was before his untimely patronage appointment by George W. Bush as attorney general--unless they had the misfortune to stand before him as a corrupt and incompetent judge in Texas. This is a good day for America, and whoever the doofus-in-Chief appoints, they're going to have watch themselves, because House and Senate Judiciary Chairs Rep. John Conyers and Sen. Patrick Leahy will be watching, and round-the-clock.

It's perverse when the attorney general of the United States is so embattled, and so defiant of the rule of law. What's more, this attorney general has been nothing but an embarrassment to this country. To further embarrass all of us all, he's going to be pardoned. That's great for him, and once more, bad for the rule of law. Congress might consider ending the ability of the executive branch to issue them after this administration (and all the others). History will not judge the former-attorney general kindly, and that hurts for individuals like Alberto Gonzales who have always wished for some kind of immortality through fame, fortune, and power. He might escape with two of the aforementioned bounties, but his time as a powerful man is done. What's interesting is the timing.

September is coming for the ostensible assessments in Congress for how badly the war in Iraq is truly going (not the president's sheltered version of "reality"--someone should introduce them sometime). It's great that Alberto Gonzales praised public service today--he should try it sometime. What's odd is that one can almost see the logic in this abrupt resignation, and that it's going to somehow stop the investigations into the U.S. attorney firing scandal. It will not. Sen. Patrick Leahy is unlikely to let this rest, because he understands--perhaps as few others in Congress do anymore--that the criminal actions of the Bush administration and her associates cannot go uninvestigated, undocumented, and unpunished. The damage to the Consitution of the United States has been far too impaired to let any of this rest. Certainly, a pardon will be in-the-offing for Gonzales, but the timing will have to be extremely precise.

On Saturday night, Gonzales was contacted by his press spokesman to ask how the department should respond to inquiries from reporters about rumors of his resignation, and Gonzales told the spokesman to deny the reports. White House spokesmen also insisted on Sunday that they did not believe that Gonzales was planning to resign. Aides to senior members of the Senate Judiciary Committee said over the weekend that they had received no suggestion from the administration that Gonzales intended to resign. (IHT, 08.27.2007)

Yes, he lies about virtually everything, even when it doesn't matter, and has no solid benefit to the liar. This is what pathological liars do. What needs to happen next? A purging of literally every single Gonzales appointment by Congress, possibly through impeachment. This would include such luminaries as Jeffrey A. Taylor, the individual who was to obstruct justice if Gonzales had continued to stonewall, and the Justice Department U.S. attorney who will obstruct on all the subpoenas still coming for former Bush administration officials like Harriet Miers and Karl Rove. That problem isn't likely to go away, and he will likely have to be removed on constitutional grounds.

The attorney general's storied history of ignoring his duty to the Constitution (TORTURE) and the rule of law first and foremost cannot go unpunished, just as it didn't go unrewarded in the criminal echelons of the Bush White House. The Nation's John Nichols made a good observation of why the departure is occurring at this time: the natives were restless in Congress, and support for his continuing on as AG was eroding rapidly:

A proposal by Washington Democrat Jay Inslee, a respected former prosecutor, to have the House Judiciary Committee investigate whether Gonzales should be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, attracted 27 cosponsors during the current recess and would have drawn many more with the return of the House in early September. The Attorney General was ripe for impeachment -- or, at the very least, the censure proposed by U.S. Senator Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin -- because of a rapidly broadening recognition that Gonzales had displayed a blatant disregard for the law since his arrival in Washington in 2001 at the side of his longtime friend and political benefactor George Bush. (The Nation/Yahoo, 08.27.2007)

As Nichols astutely points-out, the resignation is also to protect George W. Bush and Vice President Cheney from further exposure and investigation, not merely Gonzales and his cohorts in the Justice Department. In-the-end, it's all been petty moves that put personal loyalty above the time honored traditions of our Constitution--the primary responsibility of the executive branch, and by-virtue of this, the responsibility of the attorney general. This responsibility was forfeit upon his "confirmation" as attorney general. Watchdog group CREW's statement today also mirrors what most of us are thinking today.

Attorney General Gonzales' resignation is welcome – and overdue – news. His resignation should not, however, end congressional and Department of Justice investigations into misconduct by the Attorney General and his former top aides. Questions of whether Justice Department officials lied to Congress, conducted criminal inquiries to further political ends, illegally fired U.S. Attorneys and made hiring decisions based on political affiliation still merit investigation regardless of Mr. Gonzales' resignation. ... (

This sentiment can be found far-and-wide throughout the internet emanating from America today, with few-exceptions. Rags like the Washington Times are saying this is "partisan," but we know they're not the answer to any of this. They're its genesis. Now, it's time to take down this administration. Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican, a John Bircher, or a Black American, a woman, a Christian, or a Muslim, a Libertarian, a Socialist, a unionist, or an advocate for immigrant rights--it's time to save our Constitution and the liberties we all cherish. This can only come about by the downing of the Bush White House and everyone in it.

I'm not a Democrat, I'm an American. I'm not a Republican, I'm an American. It's time to be proud of this fact again, and it's time to make the promises of this nation real. Nothing less will do, and these crimes against our rights and our Constitutional traditions must be corrected. Those who did the damage must be punished, but judged fairly under the rule of law. There's nothing "radical" about this whatsoever. It's as American as apple pie. Good riddance, and prepare to be subpoenaed, former-attorney general. The president's allies in Congress--both Democrats and Republicans--are going to start feeling very-very lonely soon. That's why a number of them aren't running for reelection in 2008. Shut-up little man. Do-not-talk.

"The Caucus" (NYT blog) today:

John Nichols (The Nation) on the resignation:

The Madness Continues: Another Bearded Intruders Horoscope for the week of August 26th!

Bearded Intruders Horoscope for the week of August 26th, 2007

Current mood: awesome
Category: awesome Dreams and the Supernatural

Hello, folks. We're here for another installment of Bearded Intruders Weekly Horoscope. We got a letter from little Timmy Johnson in Stockdale, Oklahoma. He asked, "Why do you call your horoscope "weekly" when it doesn't come out every week? Didn't you FORESEE this when you named your horoscope?"Well, Timmy, we call it a "weekly" horoscope because our revelations are only for a one week period. NOT because we intend to do one every single week.

We feel like, and we've stated this before, that you people become too dependent on our revelations when we divulge too much too often. And we're NOT psychics (fuck those assholes), we're ASTROLOGICAL TECHNICIANS. We're not "seeing" anything except what the stars mapped out before us a million years ago. It's all there in the skies. And if you ever take that kind of tone with us again, Timmy, written OR otherwise, we'll kick your snot-nosed little ass. And I don't care if you're seven. Now on to your futures.
For the week of August 26, 2007:

ARIES (March 21-April 19): Put things in perspective. Keep in mind that, while YOU might think you're hot stuff, not everyone has that good of an opinion about you. In fact, a lot of people say some nasty things about you behind your back. We're not naming any names, but some things are being said. You may want to rethink the tube top. [Ed.-I know who killed me.]

TAURUS (April 20-May 20): Not just anyone can be the "biggest whore in town." That's something you have to work hard to achieve. But your determination is impressive. In the week ahead you will have a chance to make a concentrated effort to attain worthy ambitions. [Ed.-Enough about the GOP already--haven't they had enough abuse?! Nope, we've just begun.]

GEMINI (May 21-June 20): Trust is a deciding factor. Sure, you lied about that job. And you lied about your inheritance... and your "friends" in city hall. You lied about getting the payment in on time, and about leaving the mayonnaise on the counter. That doesn't mean people don't trust you. If one or two people can't forgive and forget, that's their problem. It's not like you lied about every single thing. Not EVERY day.

CANCER (June 21-July 22): Turn away from hassles. Go hunting in the parks or dark alleyways for that "just perfect" trophy of conquest. You may be thrown in contact with ambitious, hardworking individuals, so stay on your toes. Avoid Scorpios. [Ed.-Chief Justice Scalia might want to cancel anymore hunting-trips with Vice President Cheney.]

LEO (July 23-Aug. 22): Tell it like it is. That "casserole" was atrocious. Being nice to save someone's feelings is only going to make matters worse. It was unbearably disgusting, and the only decent thing to do is to let everybody know so it doesn't happen again. Little white lies will only ensure that you get another helping in the future. Think of the children.

VIRGO (Aug. 23-Sept. 22): Those pictures that you posted online have finally "come home to roost." So you've lost your internet privileges. You were just attracting a bunch of skeezy losers anyway. Get in touch with Slick down at the club. He'll set you up with some real contacts. Be ready for anything. For extra good luck, give a Scorpio a fifty dollar bill, and tell him he's got a nice butt.

LIBRA (Sept. 23-Oct. 22): In some cases, kindness trumps intelligence. Since you're both mean and stupid, you don't have to worry about this. Try to not be an asshole for five minutes this week. If you try this once a week, for a year, you MIGHT be able to bump it up to six minutes. With determination, you might even make a friend someday. We all have to live with you, so let someone know if they can help. [Ed.-It ain't easy being the president.]

SCORPIO (Oct. 23-Nov. 21): Perfectionism can affect your reputation in a favorable way. Since you're about as close to perfect as one can get, you should have smooth sailing, as per usual. Look out for Cancer people (they're acting weird this month), and make friends with a Virgo (it might pay off).

SAGITTARIUS (Nov. 22- Dec. 21): You'll be slapped in the face with bird shit some time very soon. Do not try to avoid your fate, it will only make things worse. For example, if you try to stay inside, a bird might get inside your home and shit all over your sofa, as well as your face. Just take it. There's nothing you can do. Also, be prepared for a new nickname.

CAPRICORN (Dec. 22-Jan. 19): Call someone's bluff. Just because they have a bunch of tattoos, and work as a dishwasher, that's not evidence that they really went to prison. He's probably just some weak, lying coward. Let him know you're on to him, and you're just the one to show him who's boss. Even if he really has been to prison, he'll respect that. [Ed.-Alberto Gonzales's new job will be a rough transition, yes.]

AQUARIUS (Jan. 20-Feb. 18): Accept an invitation, and you will be treated like family. Unfortunately for you, it's not the kind of family you would ever WANT to be a part of. Everything seems nice and innocent at first, but after dinner, the skeletons come out of the closet. Take a compass. [Ed.-CHARLIEEEEEE!!!!!!!]

PISCES (Feb. 19-March 20): You're being watched. You can feel it. The hot feeling on the back of your neck. Someone is following you, keeping track of everything you do. Preparing for some kind of awful conclusion. Don't say I didn't warn you. [Ed.-Well yeah, look at the site meter, ferchrissakes. And now, my new song is called 'CIA Heart-Attack (Killed by Death)]

IF YOUR BIRTHDAY IS THIS WEEK: Treat yourself to some awesome music. Just go to Their songs can be downloaded for free, and it's all totally over the top. Check it out. You'll fall in love and have a new reason to live after you hear some Bearded Intruders. You're Welcome! and Happy Birthday!

Sunday, August 26, 2007

Riding the Privatization Wave: SAIC Scores Another Navy Contract

/San Diego, California/Norfolk,Virginia/Washington D.C.
--J-7 doesn't contend that brother Ron and brother Gary Roughead had anything whatsoever to do with this contract:

Government contractor SAIC Inc. said Thursday it received a contract, worth more than $473 million if all options are exercised, to provide engineering and support services to the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center in San Diego. The support includes command, control, communications, computers and intelligence programs for sea, land, air and foreign military sales, the company said. (AP, 08.16.2007)
Nothing here, move along. Nothing to do with Duke Cunningham or any related or similar activities here. You think SAIC services Saudi Arabia on anything? Sorry, you can't ask those questions. Keep your opinions and analysis to yourselves, leave it to the experts and professionalized journalists, they know best. They know what's proper and good for all of us.

And brother Ron's call to Pamela Martin & Associates in 2005--that had nothing to do with any defense contracts whatsoever, there's no possibility whatsoever that it resembles Cunningham's and Brent Wilkes's procurement of prostitutes for CIA contracts (spanning the years 2002-2005) in DC. No, let's just focus on the politicians while these folks get to hide in the shadows.
And there's no connection that Wilkes worked out of San Diego, where SAIC's headquarters is, not even tangential. The press isn't ignoring these potential connections either, and are doing a fine job pulling it all together (snicker). We should know any day now, rather than decades later when it doesn't matter anymore. We can also rest assured that there were several other bidders in the contract that SAIC won (move along). And no, if you do a google search of "Brent Wilkes SAIC," you won't find any pertinent articles at all, none. And Duane P. Andrews probably doesn't figure into all of this either, nor his connections to Dick Cheney.

Also, Kyle Dustin "Dusty" Foggo (former San Diego cop, now CIA spook and defendant) is not a procurer of prostitutes any more than Ed Norris (former convicted Baltimore Police Commissioner). And as we all know, SAIC never uses minorities in San Diego to sign-on as subcontractors to more easily procure a contract, not ever. It's a good thing the FBI pacified those folks in San Diego back in the late-1960s, early-70s (when SAIC was being founded), so they could exploit them to procure those coveted defense and intelligence contracts on-the-sly through loopholes. Thank you J. Edgar Hoover, thank you so very much.

AP, 08.16.2007:

Nothing to do with SAIC or the Rougheads:

The American Prospect (nothing on SAIC or Duane P. Andrews here), 03.30.2007:

Another article that has nothing to do with SAIC and Cunningham's possible connections and similar MOs, 06.06.2006:

Saturday, August 25, 2007

Is Ann Coulter really James St. James? (Apologies to James)

You tell me, man...


Washington D.C.
--In e-mails and in our interview, Ms. Palfrey compared her situation as being very much like the "Profumo" scandal, and that it might involve a government official divulging information to a sex worker who was an operative for a foreign intelligence agency (though it should be noted here that many operatives frequently work all sides). It's an incredible assertion, and Palfrey has yet to provide evidence of it. However, this writer tends in that direction as well.

The evidence could very well be in her phone records, and she's currently waiting for a decision on the gag ruling by Federal District Judge Gladys Kessler. She's been correct about the majority of her public assertions so far: just ask Randall L. Tobias. Then, there's Harlan K. Ullman, military strategist and think tank advisor, professor, author, and-then-some. He's refused to talk at all, despite the defendant's attempts to subpoena him. An examination of the Profumo affair is instructive here:

What brought Profumo down even more than his deceit of the [House of] Commons, was the startling revelation that Keeler had also slept with Eugene Ivanov, the naval attache at the Soviet embassy. It was that detail which captured world attention, notably in the United States, where the FBI compiled a detailed report called Operation Bowtie [Ed.-the FOIA link to the files is now dead]. In Britain, Profumo's downfall naturally caused a huge sensation, inflated by the establishment's crude and cruel attempts to find scapegoats for its own embarrassment. As usual, official wrath was turned on those least able to defend themselves. Stephen Ward was prosecuted for living on immoral earnings. On the last day of his trial, he killed himself with an overdose of sleeping tablets. Keeler was also tried and imprisoned on related charges. (Guardian, 04.10.2001)
Tory War Minister John Dennis Profumo slept with Keeler, who slept with a Soviet spy. He might have said things to Keeler that he shouldn't have, and she may have conveyed it (accidentally?) to the Soviet Eugene Ivanov. Do we have a similar scenario here? Were federal investigators looking for something else entirely when they searched Deborah Jeane Palfrey's Vallejo home? What were 12 SWAT-equipped ("assault-rifles and masks," says one source) Howard county police doing at Brandy Britton's (former employee of Palfrey's) home when she was first arrested?
She says the authorities have unfairly singled her out, made up lies, mistreated, stalked and harassed her since Jan. 17, when a team of Howard County officers burst into her quiet suburban home and ransacked the place, breaking her belongings, upsetting her pets and arresting Britton on prostitution charges. “It sounds paranoid, but they did really serious criminal stuff,” Britton says. “They’ve broken into my house 10 or 15 times. They’ve tapped my phones. They put a tail on me and follow me everywhere.” (, 10.26.2006)
That sounds like overkill for a woman who was anonymously accused of soliciting sex.What were they looking for? Was it an e-mail or document(s) relating to a scenario much like that between War Minister Profumo and Christine Keeler? Who is the Christine Keeler in this case? Who is/are the Profumo(s)? This leads us to...

Paul Wolfowitz's recent scandal could very well be connected to all of this: was his "girlfriend" really his beau? What is the entire background of Shaha Ali Riza? Could she be a deep cover agent for a Middle Eastern nation? There appears to be some smoke here, and it behooves us to ask the question of whether Wolfowitz compromised himself by uttering national security secrets in the presence of Ali Riza, and maybe others--could this be the real heart of this whole scandal?

Is there a connection between Wolfowitz and Tobias in all of this? Is there a connection between them and their "concerns" over the international sex trade and human trafficking? Gulf state nations like Saudi Arabia are notorious violators of such international agreements, importing sex-slaves from the region, including Southeast Asia, South Korea, and Africa. Read on.

Amazingly, the world press and everyone but the American public knew that Wolfowitz's girlfriend already worked at the World Bank before his appointment, and were reporting it widely:

There is Republican pressure to reform the World Bank so that it becomes more of a facilitator for private-sector involvement and less of a direct intervener. Mr Wolfowitz’s girlfriend, Shaha Ali Riza, works at the World Bank. Ms Riza, who was born in Tunis and grew up in Saudi Arabia, is an ardent proponent of spreading democratic rights throughout the Arabic world. Her low-key presence in Mr Wolfowitz’s life surprises critics, who assert that he masterminds a Zionist conspiracy from the Pentagon. (The Times, 03.17.2005)
Again, this was even before Wolfowitz was appointed World Bank President. Someone might want to ask Ms. Ali Riza if she's ever worked for the Saudi General Intelligence Directorate under Prince Turki al-Faisal (once Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the United States, Great Britain, and Ireland). How did Shaha Ali Riza--a British subject at the time--obtain security clearances for the State Department and the Pentagon? Is she a triple-agent? No answers appear to be forthcoming here.

Of course, much of this is connected to late-April of this year, when the Wolfowitz/World Bank scandal broke. Paul Wolfowitz had--and still has--many detractors, but there was an odd "defender": former U.S. Attorney and international law and diplomacy prof at John Hopkins, Ruth Wedgwood. Her own location puts her very close geographically to the death of Brandy Britton, as well as what could be a sprawling web-of-corruption in Baltimore involving prostitution, police corruption at the highest-levels, political warfare, and much more. Where does Wedgwood fit into all of this? On April 17th, 2007, she did something peculiar: she wrote a defense of World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz for the L.A. Times called "The Wolfowitz non-story."
The authors of this acrid affair have nakedly forgotten the standards of fairness and due process owed Riza, who is a member of the bank staff association and entitled to its fiduciary protections. And the scandal-mongers have recklessly ignored a written record of bank documents that serves not to condemn but to exculpate Wolfowitz. (L.A. Times, 04.17.2007)
Oddly, a number of the facts she trots-out in the opinion piece tends towards the thesis that Ali Riza has an intelligence background. As we all know now, she was wrong about Wolfowitz on several counts, and hid her credentials as a staunch-supporter and beneficiary of the Bush administration (they appointed her as an Assistant U.S. Attorney) and Wolfowitz.

Wedgwood's article is a smokescreen, and her credibility is in-question. A reply was in-the-offing, and it came to the L.A. Times on April 30th from "Islamic Law expert and photojournalist" Sarah Whalen after angry readers pointed-out Wedgwood's connections to the Bush administration and the embattled World Bank President:

Ordinarily, expert opinions by former assistant U.S. attorneys like Wedgwood count for something. But Wedgwood, sputtered one angered reader, is biased. "For the Times to publish her column without disclosing her close ties to the Bush administration is inexcusable," scolded reader Gerald Shea. ...Wedgwood should address the real legal question facing Wolfowitz and Shaha: How did Shaha, a Libyan national with British citizenship, get her Pentagon and U.S. State Department security clearances? Sidney Blumenthal first raised this issue in his recent Guardian article, "Wolfowitz Sinking Into Endless Scandal." Shaha needed security clearances for her Wolfowitz-engineered "leave of absence" from the World Bank to her consulting job at Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) [Ed.-This is the same intel contractor who employs Ron Roughead, found in the phone records of Pamela Martin & Associates. Emphasis added] and later to her State Department job. But she apparently didn't have them. "Who intervened?" Blumenthal asks. (L.A. Times, 04.30.2007)
That's right, who allowed Shaha Ali Riza those security clearances? When we know their name(s), they're going to be leaving office. Perhaps they already have--in-part--in the person of Paul D. Wolfowitz...and possibly Randall L. Tobias. It's important to put your middle-initial in there to at least look and sound prominent. Merely sleeping with a woman does not explain Tobias's immediate departure from the State Department. What generates and motivates these kinds of scandals and the usage of "honey traps"? Usually, overarching national and strategic-aims...

Saudi Arabia has been concerned about the status of the several break-away Republics in Central Asia which are primarily Muslim. They also provide pipeline routes and sources of oil and natural gas. The aims of all of this--employing someone like Shaha Ali Riza in deep cover--would be to ascertain what the State Department's and the Pentagon's planning on these regions would entail. Whether he knew it or not, Paul Wolfowitz might have allowed a spy for MI6/MI1c/SIS/the Saudi Intelligence Directorate/etc. to have extraordinary access and clearance within these institutions. This could be some of that context:

At the same time, members of the ruling dynasty, including the directors of several big oil companies and high-ranking officers of the General Intelligence Service, were pursuing clearly practical aims. They viewed Central Asia as part of a larger region, stretching from Pakistan in the South, to the Russian Caucasus in the North. Besides the diffusion of their influence over the local Muslims, and the competition with Turkey and Iran, the Saudis were interested in participating in a greater number of regional projects for the mining and transporting of energy resources.
Not having the possibility of neutralizing the competition with the Eurasian states in the oil and gas markets, Riyadh relied on getting a share of the income from their future profits. It was with this purpose in mind that Delta Oil Company developed its activity in Afghanistan; Gulf Star company and Dallah al-Baraka Group did the same in Kazakhstan; and the Caucasian Investment Bank was established for developing work in the Caucasus (with the help of the commercial structures belonging to the Saudi billionaire, Adnan Khashoggi). Pakistani partners were actively helping the Saudis to attain their goals. (, 11.30.2005)
Is this a segment of "hookergate's" genesis? Sources are telling me that it could be. Was Shaha Ali Riza a sex worker? Did she have connections to these channels? "On December 11th, 2006, then-ambassador Prince Turki al-Faisal left his post "after 15 months." ('Saudi Ambassador Abruptly Resigns, Leaves Washington." (Washington Post, 12.12.2006) Is there a connection? More later.

The Washington Post on the suicide of Brandy Britton (and a curious admission on their part),01.30.2007:

"UNDER THE SIGN OF ANDIJAN-Saudi Intelligence Versus the Pentagon:

Friday, August 24, 2007

Ed Norris: He won't talk (and neither will Rawstory)

WWW--It would behoove Ms. Alexandrovna and associates to publish her findings from Rawstory's twelve hours of interviews with the former Baltimore Police Commissioner (search this blog under his name for previous articles). You don't conduct that many "sittings" if the interviewee says nothing of value.

But let's be fair: If it's nothing, just a lot of self-serving garbage, fine, don't run it. If it is significant, then let it be part of the public record. Palfrey has communicated to this author that Norris has been trying to get his side of his predicament out to the press for awhile. He does have his own radio and television shows, after all.

Norris clearing the air might clarify areas of Deborah Jeane Palfrey's own predicament (she's parted-ways this week with her court appointed criminal representation, Preston Burton, over "irreconcilable differences" [Ed., 08.28.2008--Like the fact that she was probably suicidal.]). I'm unaware of anyone else who has gotten Edward T. Norris to talk as much as Rawstory. I'm assuming that they there were ostensibly about his own plea deal and the events surrounding his own legal predicament.

At some point, they hit-a-bump in some a priori assumptions, and had to scuttle the story. [Ed., 08.28.2008--Alexandrovna explained to me in an angry e-mail that Palfrey and her civil attorney had failed to meet her as planned by a prior-agreement. She also mentioned things that could be construed as a violation of a confidentiality agreement.] There is also another possibility that could run parallel with the aforementioned issues--that Rawstory cannot release the materials under a confidentiality agreement.
There might also be fears on-his-part of government retaliation regarding his original plea deal. Was Palfrey part of this deal? She has made comments that it might, but has also mentioned that Norris would deny any involvement with her.

Where does Ed Norris fit-in in the saga of "Hookergate"? Does he fit-in at all, or is he just a red-herring? This writer would like to know, and he's sure that the public would too. Where does Norris fit-in with the murder of assistant U.S. attorney Jonathan Luna? Does he at all? Ms. Palfrey has contended there might be a connection between all-three. Do the interviews with Norris support any of this? Again, it's like a dialogue with the Sphinx.

What did Ed Norris say in those interviews? Surely, a journalist and their associates would not spend that much time if he hadn't said something important initially in the first hours of their conversations. The interviews should be turned-over to author Bill Keisling, and other interested researchers, it could be a motherlode of information. Of course, Mr. Norris could just start talking to other journalists, so it's on him as well.

If there's nothing in them, allay our fears, and be forthcoming about it. There was a time when this writer really felt Rawstory was doing their best--and they may be doing so regardless of my suspicions--but they've raised some flags. It could just be journalistic method on-their-part, or it could be something insignificant. My hope is that it's something insignificant, and perhaps Mr. Norris needs to contact Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee to clarify things. There could be a lot her concerning the Bush Justice Department and so many other transgressions that they've commited in the name of upholding the law.

Former U.S. attorney Thomas DiBiagio might have to be subpoenaed as well, since he was involved in the prosecution of Mr. Norris. He was also acting U.S. attorney when one of his assistant U.S. attorneys--Jonathan Luna--was murdered. DiBiagio was also the first U.S. attorney fired by the Bush administration, since the number is really nine, not eight, as misreported by much of the mainstream media.

It's not hard to fathom why a defendant wouldn't be forthcoming about all the details of their case, regardless of their guilt or innocence. What's disappointing is that many in the press began with a presumption of guilt as soon as this story broke in October of 2006--just weeks-away from the U.S. attorney firings. We should be looking to see if there is any connection here with all of this.
Ask Ed:

Ask Larisa: , then ask yourself.

Thursday, August 23, 2007

Instant Gratification's Next-Step: More Flavor

Your Tongue (My Ire)--A dear friend and I were shopping in the suburbs of Cincinnati recently and went to this great place called "Jungle Jim's," a truly international grocery store, and it has everything. But walk around any supermarket, and you'll see flavored items for nearly everything--including things to eat and drink that don't need them. Additionally flavored Vanilla creamers! What's next? I'm waiting for "flavored-flavoring with added-flavor."

Are these the people who never grew-up enough to eat vegetables? The instructions will be simple: "Place your head in the microwave and time it for five-minutes. Press start." America's 30% (90 million drooling-assholes can be very-very wrong, most of their lives) that would support any president like George W. Bush will comply, saving us all a lot of future trouble. Nobody said evolution (or journalism) was friendly or fair...


Travis Bickle: Listen, you fuckers, you screwheads. Here is a man who would not take it anymore. A man who stood up against the scum, the cunts, the dogs, the filth, the shit. Here is a man who stood up. --From Paul Schrader's screenplay to Martin Scorsese's 1976 film, "Taxi Driver." (imdb)

Baltimore, Maryland--At 57-years-old, it's unlikely that Arthur Bremer is going to be a threat to many, and certainly not George Wallace, the late segregationist governor and politician from Alabama. When Bremer belatedly shot Wallace at a campaign appearance for his bid for the presidency on May 15th, 1972, it was considered a real shock, and a reflection of the chaos of the times.

According to prison officials, Bremer has never shown any remorse for the wounding and crippling of the 'nigger-baiting' scoundrel, but it has to be said that Wallace was forever changed by the experience spiritually. Thanks to Arthur Bremer, we know what it took to stop George Wallace and his calculated appeals to Southern racists: shooting him. However, like most of the assassinations of that period, there are innumerable unanswered questions and problematic facts.

But the AP piece really nails the crux of the case: Bremer refers to Wallace in a 1996 parole hearing as a "segregationist dinosaur," just two years before the wheelchair-bound baiter died in 1998. Unsurprisingly, he was denied parole. What's not in the article, or in the peculiar reasoning of the parole board members in 96' is that Wallace incited many people in the South during the 1950s into the early-1970s to segregationist violence and harassment of Black (and White) civil rights workers.

Like anyone with a pulse, Bremer saw an individual--not a man--who was willing to play with people's lives by inciting people to racist-attacks, taunting, and full-on violence. Not that Wallace was alone, even Richard Nixon got in on the fun. His take on America 11-years-ago is interesting, accurate, and breathtaking:

"Everyone is mean nowadays ... (We've) got teenagers running around with drugs and machine guns, they never heard of me," he said. "They never heard of the public figure in my case, and they couldn't care less. I was in prison when they were born. The country kind of went to hell in the last 24 years." (AP, 08.23.2007)
Indeed, America has truly gone to hell, even since the time of Bremer's statements.

There is ample evidence to suggest that a rollback of Black Americans' right to vote was intentionally impaired by forces like Wallace in the national elections of 2000, 2004, and even 2006 (more people were watching the GOP closely in 2006, so it wasn't as successful). Taking down a cold, calculated segregationist politician appears to be why Bremer shot Wallace--but is there more? Could be. Wallace was the only real threat to Nixon's 1972 reelection ambitions, just as he had been in 1968...along with Bobby Kennedy.

Regardless of what conclusion one makes, the downing of Wallace wouldn't be enough for Nixon, and he would instruct his operatives ("the plumbers") to burglarize Democratic campaigning offices at the Watergate. They were also ordered to bug the phones.

One needs to look at who handled the FBI's investigation into the Wallace shooting, and it's not comforting at all. It was Mark Felt, then assistant FBI director to L. Patrick Gray III
(Hoover having died in early-May of 1972), who handled the investigation, and it was rife with problems and jurisdictional turf-battles between the Bureau and the Secret Service. Wallace believed in the immediate aftermath of the assassination attempt that President Nixon was behind it all. Mark Felt and Bob Woodward have confirmed that the Nixon administration was watching Wallace's "every move" in the run-up to the assassination attempt.

He had good reason to believe so, though nobody wants to ask Bremer any of these questions. Such political observers as Gore Vidal suggested in-the-wake of the assassination attempt that Nixon administration official Charles Colson authored Bremer's diary (published in 1973), which is an interesting charge. This would be especially peculiar if true, since screenwriter Paul Schrader based a lot of his script for "Taxi Driver" (1976) on Bremer's diary. He could be right, particularly in light of this exchange between President Nixon and Colson from a later May 15th call:

PRESIDENT NIXON: Is he a left winger, right winger?
COLSON: Well, he's going to be a left winger by the time we get through, I think.
PRESIDENT NIXON: Good. Keep at that, keep at that.

Colson might be able to clarify a lot of this, but he has left an oral history with the National Archives, and is featured prominently in the legendary tapes. What's a little unsettling is the early-coverage of Bremer's trail in that proverbial "run-up" to the shooting of Wallace. Felt provided his protege--Bob Woodward--with the "scoop." Was Woodward too credulous? Does that even have to be asked anymore?

...On May 18, I did a Page One article that said, among other things, "High federal officials who have reviewed investigative reports on the Wallace shooting said yesterday that there is no evidence whatsoever to indicate that Bremer was a hired killer."

It was rather brazen of me. Though I was technically protecting my source and talked to others besides Felt, I did not do a good job of concealing where the information was coming from. Felt chastised me mildly. But the story that Bremer acted alone and without accomplices was a story that both the White House and the FBI wanted out. (Washington Post, 06.02.2005)
If the stories were accurate, what was so "brazen" about reporting Bremer's days before the shooting? Perhaps he's just referring to the fact that he might have nearly blown Felt's cover as his source inside the FBI as the assistant Director, but Watergate hadn't even happened yet. What's going-on here? Felt was feeding Woodward the information on Bremer, he was pulling-the-strings, not his protege. One might suspect that they both had an overarching agenda that preceded Watergate itself, and that the real story has yet to be told.

One would think the Washington Post's editor is writing in code. Nobody said journalism would be easy...unless you're lazy and incompetent. Then, it's really easy, and we don't have to get into all those ugly confrontations! Why can't we be friends? Indeed, Bob Woodward has taken this to-heart with the current administration. There's good reason to think he's done it several-times before. Aren't American polticians great?

Listen, you fuckers, you screwheads. Here was a man who wouldn't take it any more. Here is a man who stood up to the scum, the shills, the lobbyists, and the DOJ. Here is...a man. The pen is mightier than Arthur Bremer's gun (that's why you buy-off people like Bob Woodward, et. al.).