NH residents say hell no to the Real ID.

Check out the video here.

Who apparently had his feelings hurt.

Crooks and Liars has the video.

Charlie Savage at the Boston Globe says this ain’t far from dictatorship as Bush chooses which laws to enforce and which to ignore (more than 750 so far).

It seems to me that the president does have the authority to refuse to enforce laws he believes are unconstitutional. Which of us wouldn’t pardon all the drug and gun possession charges and threaten any federal prosecutor who files them in the future with prosecution for violating people’s rights on our first day in office?

The problem is that the laws he’s ignoring are all restrictions on his power which David Addington and Jay Bybee have informed him is unlimited. He is used his “inherent” and “plenery” powers of the commander in chief clause to “determine” that Afghanistan was a “failed state” so they could ignore the laws enforcing Geneva’s ban on torture, in this case, of suspected Taliban and al Qaeda members in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay and at God-knows-what “ghost prisons” around the world. This is the same “authority” which was later brought to the prison camps in Iraq such as Abu Ghraib.

He also seems to think that he’s got the authority to bomb Iran on his own whim.

Spooner was right, the constitution either created this mess or couldn’t stop it, either way it’s illegitimate now.

My friend Jeff Frazee, former staffer to Congressman Ron Paul and graduate student at Texas A&M, has written a great op-ed piece in defense of the right of academic types like John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt to write articles critical of American foreign policy toward Israel without being called a couple of Nazis.

I tend to agree with him on this one.

Must have forgotton September 11th.

“You’re a member of the Project for the New American Century.”

“Yes.”

“How’s that project going?”

Crooks and Liars has the video.

American Dead in Iraq.

No one knows how many Iraqis.

Did anyone ever answer Cindy’s question?

Two weeks ago I wrote up a little diddy called “Indict the Department of Justice” about the criminal nature of every single one of America’s post-9/11 terrorism cases, and ending with the question of whether the State could get a conviction of the father and son in Lodi, California (later updated, answer “Yes” for the latter) based on the bought and paid for ($350,000) testimony of a single witness who also claimed on the stand that Ayman al-Zawahiri was in town in 1999 - a lie so perposterous that even the lying, murdering Department of Justice disavowed it.

While the jurors deliberated, all the headlines were about “sighs of relief” from the people in town who were realizing belatedly that the national government of the United States and the criminals who run it are more than happy to frame and convict an innocent person - in this case their neighbor. Upon finding out that the accused were set-up by the state, and remembering also that they aren’t of Pakistani dissent, most of the folks in town felt great knowing they weren’t in danger from terrorist “sleeper cells” or the state at any point in the near future.

Then the goofball jury convicted the son anyway!

Now one of the jurors is trying to renounce her vote, saying she was “pressured” into it.

God save America from our government and all accused whose lives are placed in the hands of dimwits like this - when they get jurys at all.