Bugliosi testimony at 'Impeachment Hearing' of Bush Administration; July 25, 2008

There was an Impeachment Hearing in Congress on Friday, July 25, 2008 (google Impeachment Hearings in news to read more - here is brief synopsis). Maybe it wasn't widely reported in the news, but C-Span did carry it - 6 hours. Rep. Kucinich was persistent in getting the Hearing, and while it was more of a Hearing to determine if Impeachment Hearing should be initiated, it did provide for testimony entered into the Congressional Record. I'm delighted that Vincent Bugliosi was invited to share testimony based on his latest released book (which we bought and own) 'The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder'

Here are the three youtube videos of Vincent Bugliosi testimony at the Hearing.





Vincent Bugliosi at the Hearing, in response to question from Rep. Jackson Lee. Bugliosi makes the case for why Saddam Hussein was not an imminent threat to the United States of America. Bugliosi makes important distinction that it was moot whether Saddam did or did not have weapons of mass destruction. Rather that in classified document provided to this Administration, 16 intelligence agenices counseled and advised that Saddam was not a threat; whereas the White Paper presented by the Administration to Congress and the American people did not disclose this advising counsel. Rather the White Paper presented as fact (that Saddam was an imminent threat to U.S.) when, in fact, it was not factual. Thus is the lie by which this Administration perpetrated on this country, leading the U.S. to invade Iraq on an entirely false premise.

Who killed the electric car? - video

Bugliosi's book spells out case against George W. Bush for Murder. Is momentum building?

I ordered Vincent Bugliosi's newest book 'The Prosectution of George W. Bush for Murder' from my local library and began reading it a couple weeks ago. My husband, rather intrigued, asked if he could take it to work with him to read during breaks and I agreed. So I haven't finished reading the book -- yet. But as much as I've read has been exactly right on the mark.

Learned of the book, and was ready to put off reading yet another book about the lying President, but I already have respect for Vincent Bugliosi for his successful prosectution of Charles Manson, and the book he wrote about that trial 'Helter Skelter'. So I took a chance on the library being able to obtain it for me sometime. Wasn't even sure it would be in library circulation yet as the book is fairly newly released. I was surprised when the library phoned me to pick up the books I ordered and one of the books was 'The Prosectuion of George W. Bush for Murder'. So I started reading on a quiet early morning.

This past year I've been working on trying to quiet down from the intensity of the past five years of my activism as a military family speaking out. My perpetual state of anger and outrage has put me out of balance and harmony with my own internal life and well being. I was somewhat sure the Bugliosi's book would harness and regnerate all that intensity, so was reluctant to take the plunge, yet I have carried without reservation in my heart that this man who holds the office of President of the United States and ordered up on lies and deceptions this war in Iraq with all of it the devastating carnage of killing, death, dying, horrific maiming deserves to be on the receiving end of justice - and not simply an impeachment from which he can walk away pretty much unscathed, unrepentent, without remorse and without accountability for what he has unleashed.

Having George W. Bush prosecuted for murder by the legal system in this country fits for me, and having him declared guilty and spending time jailed works for me. The case laid out by Bugliosi in a call to action for such a prosecution is an effort and action I can support and get behind. I'm not sorry then that I felt compelled to seek out Bugliosi's book 'The Prosectution of George W. Bush for Murder'.

I was all the more compelled when I read this from article by Linda Milazzo who interviewed Bugliosi about his new book

Vince doesn't use a computer. He writes his books long hand on canary pads. He has no email address, doesn't surf the web, doesn't google, doesn't have a cell phone, and doesn't know the rest of us exist! He laughs when I tell him the blogosphere has become the mainstream. He doesn't know what a blog is, or a website. He's amused by the iPod I use to record our talk, and amazed by the iPhone I use to take his photo (above). Yet for all his lack of technology savvy, he did comprehend that without one corporate TV appearance and no major newspaper review, his book still debuted at #17 on the New York Times Best Seller list and at #30 on Amazon.com. Three weeks ago, when his book first launched to a corporate media blackout, his book signing lines at Book Expo America in Los Angeles were two hours long. When I explain to Vince that the internet drove that enthusiasm, he begins to catch on.

As I began reading the book, with the recognition that Bugliosi was not following the Iraq war using internet, but the more traditional news media, so he was not exposed to what some like to dismiss as radical, revolutionary or conspiracy theory kind of mentality. And as I was reading how Bugliosi came to arrive at his conclusion that George W. Bush should be prosecuted for murder, I felt like I was reviewing a history of the many of the postings I've placed here over the years at my own blog, Dying to Preserve the Lies.

Apparantly there is a corporate or media blackout on promoting Bugliosi's book - an experience he has not encountered in his years of authoring books . Given the topic and title of his book, why am I not surprised that media won't touch his book. But that hasn't prevented his book from reaching #12 on the New York Times Best Seller List. The word is getting out, and I look forward to seeing the momentum grow as the book (case) catches on amongst those with legal minds and in a position to do something.

From Linda Milazzo's interview with Vincent Bugliosi and her article on June 23, 2008 at Huffington Post - 'A Call to Heroes'

Which brings us to Vince's CALL TO HEROES. The heroes in Vince's case are those who would prosecute George W. Bush for murder in an American court of law - which includes the hundreds of city and county District Attorneys, the fifty State Attorneys General and any of the ninety-three U.S. Attorneys in the nintey-three federal districts for whom Vince established jurisdiction to proceed with the case. Vince is certain that amongst this vast population of prosecutors, there is at least one patriot who loves this nation deeply enough to hold Bush accountable for the murders of over 4,000 service men and women whom he lied into going to war.

The good news for whomever does step forward to take George Bush to task is the promise of assistance from Bugliosi himself - who as a prosecutor is held in the highest regard. In the words of famed defense attorney F. Lee Bailey, Vince is "the quintessential prosecutor." For Harvard Law Professor, Alan Dershowitz, Vince is "as good a prosecutor as there ever was." Thus, Vince's offer to serve as consultant to whomever accepts the case should be incentive enough to take it on - especially since whomever does take it on will encounter instant fame. Vince has also offered to accept a Special Prosecutor appointment from any U.S. Attorney or District Attorney who would like him to try the case.

Ingrigued? Interest piqued?

Then read an updated article from Linda Milazzo (also at Huffington Post) on June 29, 2008 - 'Momentum Building for Bugliosi's Case Against George W. Bush for Murder' and enjoy the five videos posted there of Bugliosi speaking about his book.

It is not my intent to regurgitate Linda's articles, there is no need, so read those for yourselves. But it is my intent to do my bit in promoting Vincent Bugliosi's book and I would love to see momentum build around an effort to do exactly that - prosecute George W. Bush for Murder. He has earned and deserves the scrutiny of the justice system for how he has abused and misappropriated the powers of the Office of the President of the United States.

Congressman Brian Baird talks on the issues at Town Hall Meeting July 1, 2008

Attended U.S. Representative Brian Baird Town Hall Meeting in South Bend, Pacific County, Washington on July 1, 2008. I had very personal reasons for wanting to talk to Congressman Baird this year based on our experience talking with him at his Town Hall meeting last summer.

You may recall that last year Congressman Baird made national news in his support of the 'Surge' (of U.S. troops deployed to Iraq. We were in great opposition and wanted him to know as his constituents living in his district our views as a military family, with 2 returning Iraq veterans.




Congressman Brian Baird talking with Lietta Ruger, Town Hall Meeting, South Bend, July 1, 2008

(photo courtesy of Steven Friederich of the Daily World)


This year, at his Town Hall meeting, which covered a range of issues, I had opportunity to discuss the Surge one year later with him.

On Monday, June 30, I received an email from Congressman Baird’s office advising he was holding a Town Hall meeting in South Bend, on July 1 (the next day). He holds Town Hall meetings annually in towns and cities across his district. I wanted to attend, for a couple of reasons.

Some background: Last summer, Congressman Brian Baird held a Town Hall Meeting in Raymond, and this was at the time that Congressman Brian Baird who had voted against the invasion into Iraq, decided that he wanted to come out approving President Bush’s ‘Surge’ of U.S. troops in Iraq. Congressman Baird had made a trip to Iraq last year, to assess the situation of war in Iraq and had conversation with General Petreaus, coming home to believe in the value of proceeding with a Surge in U.S. troops deployed to Iraq. The deaths of U.S. troops was at an increasing frequency, and violence was rampant in Iraq, IED’s and suicide bombings - killing civilians, Iraqi police and soldiers, and U.S. troops. Last year, Congressman Baird made national news in his support for President Bush’s call for a ‘Surge’ (of troops) in Iraq.

My husband and I, being a military family with 2 returning Iraq veterans (both from Washington state), attended that Town Hall meeting in Raymond, WA last summer primarily to challenge the Congressman on his support of the ‘Surge’ and it was a contentious exchange with the Congressman. Please refer to the article ‘Baird faces his constituents in Raymond’ in Daily World last September.



The article features photo of my husband, Arthur Ruger, and the pointed question he put to Congressman Baird man to man -”was the war worth our son’s blood.”, to which the Congressman responded yes, he believed it was. That was a slap in the face to us, as we do not believe, have never believed this war was worth any son or daughter’s blood. It was important to me then, last night, a year later at the Town Hall Meeting in South Bend, for me to connect to the Congressman based on our exchange from last year. That same year, in December 2007 our son-in-law deployed to Iraq in his second 15 month stop-loss, extended deployment, where he is now.

I wanted very much to attend Congressman Baird’s Town Hall meeting last night, even though I seem to have run out of things to say about the wrongness of the Iraq war. We attended, and after Congressman Baird gave his presentations, he opened it to audience questions. I listened through all of the questions, intending to ask my two questions at the end of the proceedings.

Issues discussed during course of the meeting:

Gas Prices; Astonishingly - well to us anyway - when the question of gas prices came up, as we knew it would, and someone asked about off shore oil drilling and leased land not being used for oil drilling, Brian Baird started to discuss it and then asked the audience for a show of hands as to who was in favor of off-shore oil drilling. And almost all the hands went up. Then Brian Baird asked who was not in favor, with my husband, mine and probably 3-4 other hands going up.
I was stunned. And in somewhat confused language pointed out peak oil and global warming and then gave up, saying never mind. I could not believe what I had just witnesssed. An expectation that enough information is out there now about the growing oil crisis, that I had thought more would be appreciative of our need to change our lifestyle to become less oil dependent and the urgency in finding alternative energy lifestyles.

Acidic Ocean; Congressman Baird acknowledged Al Gore’s documentary ‘An Inconvenient Truth’, and then explained to the audience about acidic ocean, disappearing coral reefs, and how as a coastal community we should be concerned about our oceans. Then he answered other questions, and while I was listening attentively, I had already recognized that once again, our views on oil dependency (my husband and mine) were indeed the minority opinions amongst the community we live in. We’ve encountered this before along the course of our speaking out against the Iraq war as military family with loved ones deployed in Iraq.

Funding Iraq War vs Domestic Needs; Later when a young reporter from the Aberdeen Daily World newspaper tossed out a comment about trading off the $$ being spent in Iraq against using for homeland needs, Congressman Baird explained that we were not using current funds, rather creating a deficit that would be paid in our children and grandchildren’s time. As Congressman Baird explained it that were we to withdraw the troops now (which he then went on to explain was a time consuming process and needed to be done responsibly so as not to leave troops exposed and at-risk), there would still be no funds available to be used for domestic concerns. Rather that it would reduce somewhat the future deficit which would be paid for by our children and grandchildren.

Copper Roof Replacement at Pacific County Courthouse; would cost considerably more than was originally estimated with rising costs of copper. Inquiry if the Congressman could get the county some $$ help to replace the copper roof. It being a historic building, must comply with regulations pertinent to historic buildings. (Read more about it at this Daily World article, ‘Costs of New Roof Skyrockets’)

The discussions flowed covering various issues:

Historic Post Office in Raymond lacking accessibility for disabled; seems because the Raymond Post Office is considered a historic building, and it lacks accessibility for disabled, changes cannot be made to the building to be more facilitative without regard to the regulations governing historic buildings. At this time, disabled citizens (wheelchair bound, or unable to manage the stairs) are unable to make access to the Post Office. (Read more about this at Daily World article, ‘Baird Hears of Acces Woes’)

Illegal Immigration: Someone asked the Congressman about illegal immigrants, and he responded by breaking it out into three categories;

a) illegal immigrants who are hardened criminals should be sent back to countries of origins, but how to do that - ask the country ‘hey will you take back so and so who is a hardened criminal?’;
b) illegal immigrants who are hired by employers knowingly as illegal and paid under the table should not be permitted to remain; and
c) illegal immigrants who are hired by employers who have verified social security number and background and taxes are being paid out of wages - those illegal immigrants have likely been here number of years, working all of those years and some provision should be provided that permits them to remain on worker permit. Congressman cited responsive employers like Coast Seafood who work to comply with current laws and have large number of immigrants employed.

Columbia-Pacific National Heritage Area Study: Included was a concern expressed by owner of Rose Ranch regarding our area (Willapa region) becoming a National Heritage region. She identified probably 10 coalitions that have concerns should we become designated a National Heritage site. I have tried to blog some about this at Washblog, but am too underinformed to articulate the concerns well.As the meeting wrapped up, I was at last able to ask my two questions;

1) Senator Cantwell obtaining $2 million towards Doppler Radar for SW Washington due to the December 07 storm (read more here) , and what was his position on that? He said fully in support. Then I pointed out that while the $2 million was great it was going to take a lot more $$ to build the Doppler, and where would that money come from, would he work towards that end. He said something about $2 million being a big drop, and likely the rest of the money might have to come from the State.

2) Last year, in your Town Hall, we talked with you about our son in Iraq because you had just gone national in your approval of the Surge, and I guess I wanted to have you inquire how he is doing. Before I could finish the sentence though, it seemed that Congressman Baird did remember and did ask how our son was doing. Which left me with a weak follow up, that really that was all I wanted was for him to inquire after our son’s well being. Then the Congressman went on to explain why he took the position that he did last year on the Surge and how it seemed to be working, violence was down. I actually did find myself saying that conditions did seem to be more favorable to our son’s (actually it is son-in-law) deployment this time, or at least I’m relieved that if he has to be there, it isn’t the year before, and that I hope he gets through this deployment and safely home.

After the meeting concluded, Congressman Baird, did come over to where I was sitting, and had some private words with me. He wanted me to know that he cares, that what I was doing as a mother was natural and he was glad that I was doing what I was doing; that what my son was doing was patriotic and what I was doing was patriotic; that when he is in DC the groups that hold vigils in DC showing the 4,000 killed, he looks at each and every face and feels it deeply.

For the most part the words he chose to use with me were agreeable, but I didn’t like the words about patriotic - and I wasn’t altogether sure he understood that I am among those military families opposed to the war in Iraq and have been speaking out against the war in Iraq. Personally, I wouldn’t say the ‘Surge’ (of troops) in Iraq is working, that would really be beyond my ability to discern. But it does seem the violence is down, and whatever strategies are being used, our son-in-law who is deployed in Iraq now in his second ’stop-loss’, extended 15 month deployment seems to be less at risk than had he been deployed in Iraq a year earlier.

As Congressman Baird was shaking my hand and done with his part of the conversation, and before I could correct any misperceptions, others were coming around, and reaching out to me, whereby I offered my smiles of appreciation. Right about then someone else said to us, wait, wait, I didn’t get the picture, and then snap went the camera. I remember saying is this a photo op and we shouldn’t be smiling then. It was a confusing moment, and then there were 2 reporters wanting me to spell my name, wanting my son (son-in-law, I corrected) name which I never give, and the moment to correct any misperceptions that the Congressman might have about my position had passed.

More details of this Town Hall Meeting reported in the Aberdeen Daily World articles here and here.