Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Bush Wiretapping In 1936 Nazi Germany

© by Stephen Neitzke, 2006

OK, is everyone clear? The presidential usurper, GW Bush, thinks that he is the dictator here and that the Constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper. He thinks he is above the law by reason of his self-proclaimed and phony War On Terrorism. He thinks that our Constitutional governance is his despotism. The majority of the US Supreme Court agrees. The majority of Congress, including many treasonous Democrats, agrees. And some significant fraction of the lower federal bench agrees.

"Judge Defers Decision on U.S. Wiretap Suit", By Jui Chakravorty, Reuters, 12 June 2006.

DETROIT (Reuters)—A federal judge on Monday deferred making an immediate decision on a request that the Bush administration's domestic eavesdropping program be halted as a violation of law.
The American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the lawsuit in January, asked U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor to stop the White House from intercepting international phone calls and e-mails without a warrant in its fight against terrorism, saying it violates Americans' free speech and privacy rights. ...
Taylor deferred any ruling. Another hearing is scheduled for July 10.
(Published by Baseline, 13 June 2006.)

No matter how undefined Taylor's intention right now, she is obviously setting up the situation so that any ruling in this case can come after Election 2006.

Any US federal court judge who can look squarely into the face of the December 2000 presidential usurpation -- and its grossly treasonous, unconstitutional, and illegal 2-party, 3-branch despotic ruination of our nation since -- and DEFER a ruling on the grossly treasonous, unconstitutional, and illegal wiretapping done by the goosesteppers at NSA on Bush's order should be deported to 1936 Nazi Germany.

If Taylor's ruling on this case comes down in favor of Usurper Bush's claims to be above our law, she will be part of the felony conspiracy against citizen rights, as defined in 18 USC 241, for the warrantless wiretaps admitted to by Usurper Bush. Warrantless wiretaps can only be done in violation of our Constitutionally guaranteed personal privacy rights and in violation of FISA, and Taylor knows it. On conviction as a co-conspirator in the felony violation of 18 USC 241, she can be fined and imprisoned for up to ten years, and she knows it. Felony forfeits judicial immunity, just as it does executive and legislative immunity -- and she knows it.

But she also knows that she is above, and will be protected from justice under, our laws. The treasonous, unconstitutional, and felonious obstructors of justice at Strassemadchenführer Gonzales' Gestapo will protect her -- as they protect all of the other fascist thugs in the Bush Usurpation.


At 6/15/2006 10:41 AM, Blogger Stephen Neitzke said...

I cross-posted this to the Truthout blog the same date as it was posted here. There's a nice thread of comments building up over there. You can read them on the post's permalink page at --


Truthout has strong anti-troll rules and obviously enforces them. Serious commentary there is not nearly as wracked with trollish money-power shills as it is on Daily Kos, MyDD, or other major "progressive" blogs.

At 6/15/2006 9:20 PM, Blogger washington voters said...

Thank you for your comment on our blog-washingtonvoters.blogspot.com.
We will add your blog address to our links.What State do you think is the most democratic; looking at the initiative signature requirement for various states it looks like Massachusetts and Ohio would be the best, what do you think? and also what do you think has been it's effect on these states?

At 6/16/2006 1:17 AM, Blogger Stephen Neitzke said...

washington voters --

I'm convnced that ther is no one measure that can clearly establish one state as the most democratic state. Analysis of "democratic", I think, must be done in terms of DD combined with the state's rep govt. How the two work both separately and together is crucial to what is "democratic".

I sent you an email today as a one-week followup after posting the comment to your blog. You might not have seen it before posing your reply here. Please find it. One of its discussion points is how state govts in all the I&R states have unconstitutionally and arbitrarily controlled citizen-proposed law at the petition level.

In most states, the controls are "separation of powers" violation and "binding judicial review" violations, clearly contradicting the state's constitution. In Massachusetts, the most bizzare of all the I&R states, the "separation of powers" and the "binding judicial review" violations are constitutional provisions -- inside the same state constitution whose earlier and still-standing provisions make the "separation of powers" and "binding judicial review" violations unconstitutional.

The 1917-1918 Massachusetts predator politicians responisble for tricking the Massachusetts citizens into approving the I&R constitutional amendment should be dug up and shot. What they did was to put unconstitutional controls of citizen-proposed law into the constitution so that any citizen petition offensive to money-power could be arbitraily delayed, altered, and/or rejected before reaching a ballot.

I&R cleanup in Massachusetts will require a constitutional convention. Until the cleanup is done, Massachusetts is,IMO, the very least "democratic" I&R state.

Don't get me wrong. DD has had many positive effects on governance in the I&R states, including Massachusetts. Money-power reaching into corrupt state govt to get citizen-proposed law killed that money-power doesn't like is just part of the story.

You can find a listing of all ballot questions that have reached the ballot in every state -- from DD's beginnings to about 2002 -- in the book, "Initiative and Referendum Almanac", edited by M. Dane Waters, published by Carolina Academic Press, 2003.

Most states have online records of their ballot questions for 2000 and later. So it's possible, with the Almanac and the Internet, to look at a complete DD record on the ballots.

The Almanac also has each state's DD requirements -- signatures and such -- as well as essays on how much DD has accomplished over its first hundred years. It's a substantial reference book that every DD advocacy group should own.

Nonetheless, the Almanac handles only those citizen measures that made it to the ballot. There is a whole 'nuther world in the ballot measures unconstitutionally squashed by corrupt state govt BEFORE they could get to a ballot.

Cleanup is needed in every I&R state. Washington's cleanup will take substantial effort -- including substantial study and comparison of the state constitution's I&R provisions with the state's statutes that form I&R's "administrative law".

It sounds daunting, but it's easier than it sounds. Look in the "Reference" links section of my blog. You've find a listing for "State Constitutions". I'll add links for "State Constitutions and Laws" -- two different sources -- as soon as Blogger lets me into the dashboard. You don't have to be a lawyer to do this sort of study and understanding. Still, if there is a people-biased lawyer or two available to you, take advantage.

There are many unconstitutional provisions in the I&R-related statutes. E.g., constitutional "separation of powers" means that no executive branch official can legally perform a legislative function in the administration of I&R. Writing, re-writing, or having approval/rejection power over any part of the I&R ballot language is
a legislative function and a violation of "separation of powers". All I&R states have such unconstitutional provisions in their I&R admin law.

As I explained in my email to you yesterday morning, no US constitution defines the judicial power to include "binding judicial review" of proposed law. In this country, "binding judicial review" can only happen AFTER a proposed law has become actual law. However, in every I&R state, the I&R admin law has unconstitutional proviisons that call for judges to do binding judicial review on citizen-proposed law.

Public official and judges who act in accord with the unconstitutional statutes, violate both state and federal law. On the federal side, they violate 18 USC 241, felony conspiracy against citizen rights. Felony forfeits judicial immunity. Do the felony, do the time.

You guys need to do some reading about the history of DD/rep-govt. I've got a link to my book list out on the sidebar. In the meantime, please read the post just previous to this one, "Direct Democrcy Blogging In The Netroots".

At 8/17/2010 3:27 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Earning money online never been this easy and transparent. You would find great tips on how to make that dream amount every month. So go ahead and click here for more details and open floodgates to your online income. All the best.

At 8/18/2010 1:54 AM, Blogger jenniferlopez said...





Post a Comment

<< Home