The transatlantic deficit order of error and ruined ethics-reputation: how privileged parties fool states and public full free trade is in-house judged & insider traded under private law: corporate reform even trailing states' interests in spite of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
A shock felt around the world!
W. Buffett's conduct preludes disclosure on the transatlantic chasm of faith: the forced public-private partnership between Exxon/Shell and the Dutch State: GASUNIE 1963, the counterparty's partnership ('Gasgate') transition to world gas-economy will not take place without disrupture of consumer confidence.
Explore this website !
'La Condition Americaine' under Gasgate 1963 and read below on the constellation of constutional and instituted treason & supreme crime:
Exxon Shellter incorporated governance following the global P3-doctrine of judicial and diplomatic crime: international GASUNIE, since 1963
www.halliburtonwatch.org
American justice denied
International Herald Tribune
by Serge Schemann, editor of the editorial page:
In the 1960s, Chief Justice Earl Warren presided over a U.S. Supreme Court that interpreted the Constitution in ways that protected the powerless - racial and religious minorities, consumers, students and criminal defendants. At the end of its first full term, Chief Justice John Roberts's court is emerging as the Warren court's mirror image.
Time and again the court has ruled , almost always 5-4, in favor of corporations and powerful interests while slamming the courthouse door on individuals and ideals that truly need the court's shelter.
President George W. Bush created this this radical new court with two appointments in quick succession: Roberts to replace Chief Justice William Rehquist and Samual Alito to replace the far less conservative Sandra Day O'Connor.
The Roberts court's resulting sharp shift to the right began to be strongly felt in this term. It was on display, most prominently, in the school desegregation ruling last week. The Warren court, and even the Rehnquist court of two years ago, would have upheld the integration plans that Seattle and Louisville, Kentucky, voluntarily adopted. But the Roberts court, on a 5-4 vote, struck them down, choosing to see the 14th Amendment's equal-protection clause - which was adopted for the express purpose of integrating blacks more fullt into society - as a tool for protecting white students from integration.
On campaign finance, the court handed a major victory to corporations and wealthy individuals - again by a 5-4 vote - striking down portions of the law that reined in the use of phony issue ads. The ruling will make it easier for corporations and lobbyists to buy the policies they want from Congress (that's exactly what incorporated governance as defined by xxell.com, stands for)
The flip side of the court's boundless solicitude for the powerful was its often contemptuous attitude toward common folks looking for justice. It ruled that an inmate who filed his appeal within the deadline set by a federal judge was out of luck, because the judge had given the wrong date - a shockingly unjust decision that overturned two court precedents on missed deadlines.
When Roberts was nominated, his supporters insisted that he beleived in " judicial modesty," and that he could not be put into an ideological box. But Alito and he, who voted together in a remarkable 92 percent of non-unanimous decisions, have charted a thoroughly predictable archconservative approach to the law. Roberts said that he wanted to promote greater concensus, but he is presiding over a court that is deeply riven.
In the term's major abortion case, the court upheld - again by a 5-4 vote - the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, even though the court struck down a nearly identical law in 2000. In the term's major church-state case, the court ruled 5-4 that taxpayers challenging the Bush administration's faith-based initiatives lacked standing to sue, again reversing well-established precedents.
In a few cases, notably ones challenging the Bush administration's hands-off approach to global warming and executions of the mentally ill, Justice Anthony Kennedy broke with the conservative bloc. But that did not happen often enough.
It has been decades since the most privileged members of society - corporations, the wealthy, white people who want to attend school with other whites - have had such a successful Supreme term.
Society's have-nots were not the only losers. The basic ideals of American justice lost as well.
McGovern: Impeach Bush, Cheney Now
Former Democratic Candidate Says Crimes Of Current Administration Worse Than Nixon's
WASHINGTON, Jan. 6, 2008
(CBS) The former Democratic nominee for president who ran against a president later driven from office under threat of impeachment, today said that impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney is "the rightful course for an American patriot."
George McGovern, a former South Dakota Senator who ran on the Democratic ticket in 1972 as an anti-war advocate, wrote in an op-ed for The Washington Post that, while he steered clear of calling for the impeachment of Richard Nixon in the '70s - fearing it would appear as "an expression of personal vengeance" against his opponent who won re-election in a landslide - McGovern said after seven years of the current administration, he has "belatedly and painfully concluded that the only honorable course for me is to urge the impeachment" of the president and the vice president.
McGovern also called the case for impeaching Mr. Bush and Cheney "far stronger" than what was the case against President Nixon and Vice President Spiro T. Agnew after the 1972 election.
McGovern admits that while there is little bipartisan support for instituting impeachment hearings (House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, has announced that impeachment is "off the table"), he said, "Bush and Cheney are clearly guilty of numerous impeachable offenses.
"They have repeatedly violated the Constitution. They have transgressed national and international law. They have lied to the American people time after time. Their conduct and their barbaric policies have reduced our beloved country to a historic low in the eyes of people around the world. These are truly 'high crimes and misdemeanors,' to use the constitutional standard."
McGovern says that American democracy has been "derailed" by the administration's commitment to "a murderous, illegal, nonsensical war against Iraq … done without the declaration of war from Congress that the Constitution clearly requires, in defiance of the U.N. Charter and in violation of international law. This reckless disregard for life and property, as well as constitutional law, has been accompanied by the abuse of prisoners, including systematic torture, in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949."
"How could a once-admired, great nation fall into such a quagmire of killing, immorality and lawlessness?" he writes.
McGovern writes that while Mr. Bush and Cheney made counterterrorism the battle cry of their administration, "their policies (especially the war in Iraq) have increased the terrorist threat and reduced the security of the United States.
"Today, after five years of clumsy, mistaken policies and U.S. military occupation, Iraq has become a breeding ground of terrorism and bloody civil strife."
McGovern said any impeachment proceedings should also look at the "collapse of presidential leadership" in the face of Hurricane Katrina, "perhaps the worst natural disaster in U.S. history."
In November Rep. Dennis Kucinich introduced a resolution, H.R. 333, calling for impeachment proceedings against Vice President Dick Cheney, which - in part because of a belief such proceedings would embarrass the Democratic leadership - was passed with overwhelming Republican support. House leaders submitted the resolution to the Judiciary Committee, where it has sat ever since. Kucinich later added that he would demand impeachment hearings against the president as well.
But while Committee Chair John Conyers, D-Mich., has advocated impeachment in the past, since the Democrats regained a majority in the House he has been more sanguine about the issue. He has suggested that such hearings could turn villains - "people who should be documented in history as making many profound errors and violating the Constitution" - into victims.
House Speaker Pelosi has likewise dismissed calls for impeachment, suggesting that hearings would detract Congress from other business, or might create a backlash among voters in November 2008, thereby threatening the Democrats' current hold on the majority.
That argument doesn’t hold sway with Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fla., who with two other House members - Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., who also sit on the Judiciary Committee - recently called for an immediate start to hearings.
In an op-ed they penned, published last month in the Philadelphia Inquirer, the three wrote that, unlike the Republicans' investigation into President Bill Clinton's personal relations, "the Democratic Congress can show that it takes its constitutional authority seriously and hold a sober investigation, which will stand in stark contrast to the kangaroo court convened by Republicans for Clinton."
One aspect of holding impeachment hearings that has attracted attention is that, unlike other congressional hearings where the administration has claimed executive privilege to resist releasing documents or subpoenaed testimony, there is no protection of executive privilege allowed under an impeachment investigation.
Therefore, any documents and testimony relating to the destruction of videotapes depicting torture, to the firings of U.S. attorneys, to the outing of a CIA operative, to secret energy meetings involving Cheney and oil industry figures, to surveillance of Americans without court-order warrants or any other controversy which the White House has refused to produce for Congress, must be given in evidence.
"Impeachment is unlikely, of course," McGovern wrote. "But we must still urge Congress to act. Impeachment, quite simply, is the procedure written into the Constitution to deal with presidents who violate the Constitution and the laws of the land. It is also a way to signal to the American people and the world that some of us feel strongly enough about the present drift of our country to support the impeachment of the false prophets who have led us astray.
"I believe we have a chance to heal the wounds the nation has suffered in the opening decade of the 21st century. This recovery may take a generation and will depend on the election of a series of rational presidents and Congresses. At age 85, I won't be around to witness the completion of the difficult rebuilding of our sorely damaged country, but I'd like to hold on long enough to see the healing begin."
583
