TRY-ANGLE NATION

Disclosure:  Just elected Hillary Clinton Delegate for my precinct. 

It was a gut decision for a truce between my head and my heart, not that I can triangulate that. 
Well... maybe it was gut-Clinton, head-Undecided, and heart-Sanders. 

With this in mind to be potentially sorted later:

Make It So[!]

To better BORG*: 
(third link below NFRY: not fully read yet)

A World War Has Begun: Break the Silence  ***

Why Young People Are Right About Hillary Clinton
Trump and Clinton Match-up?

*"BS~FD/make me" (0)
"BS~Borg" (A., B. Culture War , C., D.  Obama With Drama , E., F., G., H.)
(BS)=blog search (scroll over any hyper-links)

3-27-16

War and Peace is a false dichotomy**.

That was my heading(sub-heading for this addition) before technical difficulties wiped it out. 
I had woken up to that thought after reading only part way through a Philosophy Now article last night. [The "Ugliest of Things"?]

** or are all dichotomies false? 

*** the punch line
"You can't _ _ _ _ _ your way out of problems with the same parties that got you into them."
to paraphrase the Obama problem and the nature of our government.  Here "parties" is used in general terms, but with due respect for the three branches of government and the GOP, let alone the spirit of progress or hope to Trump nature.  I am talking about the first article on War, and the Bush campaign that was a bull in a pottery barn.(~)  (Speaking of policemen, nation builders and break it)

(~)(<) Lessons of War , Cost of Course [(~)]
Cost of Course [!], Hail to the Troops! [!]
Owe what a muddle we web. i.e. these (F'n) need review.

3-31-16
Expletive not intended, Foot Notes is the italic intent. 
Mean While... (M'w,huh,ha) 
Medved(msnbc)  (~) the last conservative president was H. W. Bush (i.e. don't count Neo-cons)
Kasich  (msnbc)  Trump puts the con in conservative. (^) Also speaks of policing and intelligence, I was waiting for nation building.
Kinder Gardener:  Do I have buyers remorse?
Well, I haven't bought anything.  And we aren't a pottery barn.  (oops unsegue)^
(return) Is the caucus system broken?  Not for Bernie.  Is the primary better? Only for Hillary?   

The Real Scoop?

The Whichgate?
The Yellow Leaks from Canada?
["NAFTAgate" Began With Remark From Harper's Chief of Staff]

It reminds me of the "yellow cake" from Africa
but they are on the trail,
and ready to send in the Mounties.

It was a very difficult read, [added 3-7-08]

["He said someone from (Hillary) Clinton's campaign is telling the embassy to take it with a grain of salt. . . That someone called us and told us not to worry."

Government officials did not deny the conversation took place.

They said that Mr. Brodie sought to allay concerns about the impact of Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton's assertion that they would re-negotiate NAFTA if elected. But they did say that Mr. Brodie had no recollection of discussing any specific candidate - either Ms. Clinton or Mr. Obama.

CTV News President Robert Hurst said he would not discuss his journalists' sources.

But others said the content of Mr. Brodie's remarks was passed on to CTV's Washington bureau and their White House correspondent set out the next day to pursue the story on Ms. Clinton's apparent hypocrisy on the North American Free Trade Agreement.]

but will it soon drop from the radar?

If this does not shine some light on the candidates,
maybe Canada can shine some light on the journalism. [the story continued]

[Although CTV correspondent Tom Clark mentioned Ms. Clinton in passing, the focus of his story was on assurances from the Obama camp.

He went to air on Feb. 27 with a report that the Democratic front-runner had given advance notice to Canadian diplomats that he was about to engage in some anti-NAFTA rhetoric, but not to take it too seriously.

The report wound up on YouTube and caused an uproar in the U.S. race - influencing the final days of the critical Ohio primary, with every indication it will also play a role in the upcoming Pennsylvania vote.]

Is this part of someones campaign or strategy?
Maybe the best we can hope is that it vets us,
even if they do not get to the bottom of it.
Of course they could sound sincere now,
but still leave someone at the bottom of it.

Canada could be shining a light on our own congress
to have the backbone to investigate our own media
and the madness of our own accountability. [more * YouTube 3-7-08 Barack Obama NAFTA Scandal: A Smear Says Canada PM 3/3]

*[3-7-08] I did not post an original YouTube that depicted CBC in this or others that ran on from it.

[3-6-08: see bottom link and is someone vetting us? and should the FEC or the FCC or both investigate YouTube? For it can spread without linking or correcting, oh what a web they weave and just who do they really peeve?]

[3-8-08 Label: NAFTAgate added]
[3-9-08: UPDATE see bottom link there ]

Hillary Clinton Says 'It Would Have Been Better' to Use Two Email Accounts - NBC News

Hillary Clinton Says 'It Would Have Been Better' to Use Two Email Accounts - NBC News

Bread Crumbs

https://motherboard.vice.com/read/why-did-the-genetic-code-of-all-life-on-earth-suddenly-stop-evolving


https://motherboard.vice.com/read/scientists-think-intelligent-life-could-have-evolved-before-brains-slime-mold-learning

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unreasonable_Effectiveness_of_Mathematics_in_the_Natural_Sciences

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MckuBQC6gKU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijjsjCv6k7w

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20150803-physics-theories-map/

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20160419-string-inflation-triangles/

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20160324-in-newly-created-life-form-a-major-mystery/


-
5-8-16
-
http://political_progress_for_people.blogspot.com/search?q=para+digm

http://www.dailynewsbin.com/opinion/field-guide-to-defending-hillary-clinton-against-fake-scandals/24710/

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/05/06/3775910/hillary-clinton-faith-profile/

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/36713-a-contested-convention-is-exactly-what-the-democratic-party-needs

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/36702-david-brooks-discovers-income-inequality

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/36742-point-of-no-return-obamas-legacy-in-the-middle-east

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/bernard-carr/time-and-consciousness_b_9855418.html?utm_content=bufferf22ec&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Curve Ball

Clinton's Strategy Under* Attack!

Ron Furier! 
Patrick Healy!
Mathews Agenda!
Team of Tergiversators?

6-10-15
*attempted inserts @ C & U
The program had several panels. 
Capeheart, Grimm, et al were later.

6-12-15
NewsNation?
Hillary Clinton Lauch: Will she energize progressives?
The Obama Coalition?  What are they?

Clinton In South Carolina

Rachel Maddow on her show:

Rachel, Rachel, Rachel...
You suggest that Obama must go on the offensive? Maybe. But not in the way that you suggest. Not by making things up. Maybe by staging events or confrontations, but not by doing exactly what the opposition is doing. Maybe that is too much faith in the American people. Hillary and Bill, clearly are taking things out of context which display there intention to confuse or inability to understand. And when they are not, the media is. I may be unfair and unbalanced but to me, Obama is more careful in his context and less offensive in his connections. The Clinton campaign should cool it, and so should the media. Even Michelle Obama's comments could not clear the filters and it is not their fault that voters and the media add their own context, just like Hillary and Bill tend to do. Correcting any misinformation and exposing any misunderstanding is one thing but more of the same is counterproductive.

Ed Schultz on Hardball:
And I just turned on MSNBC to find Ed Schultz and Pat Buchanan and a third character on Chris Mathews, and the latter two fall into just these categories and Ed Schultz sure has his hands full cutting through what Edwards would call crap. [Meanwhile Clinton (Bill) takes a swing at the press and strikes at Obama again. It is like shadow jujitsu. Only good for the dark side.]

Dana Milbank on Countdown: On Obama not being uniter.
(OK, I don't have the exact quote. I am doing the press thing.)

Never has a candidate said they will not support the other candidate. (Although Kucinich missed a chance to be clear.) But to assume that they can bring their supporters is another thing.

[Live with Dan Abrams: now -> What some call politics: "I call lawyering". ]

The Democrats can be united. If they are not they are not really Democrats. Putting a Democrat in the White House is the important thing. But putting the best Democrat in the White House is the most important thing. To do that we need the votes of not just Democrats. But that does not mean that the candidate cannot be the best Democrat as well.

Finalizing in what Rachel Maddow also noted about lies.

[Speaking of from September 2002:
A for

Cowboy]

ONE PARTY: HOLD THE LOCKSTEP!

Maybe things would not be so bad in a dictatorship. However, Plato thought about it and passed. The main problem being finding a good dictator or one benevolent to all. But maybe we should experiment with one party rule. The Republicans have done the latest research in this field and now that we know what does not work, except for those that want to trade charges about who is holding whose breath, we can breath a sigh of resignation and just have Democratic rule.

This phase of the experiment is well on it’s way. There are two beakers of influence in this chemistry set. One is the fall and rise of Howard Dean and the other ,the rise and fall of Hillary Clinton. Dean and his scream and now don’t we all wanna scream has gone from being the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party to being the leader of the Democratic Party. Hillary has now gone from being the Liberal that the Conservatives would anoint as an opponent to the darling the DLC would as well.

One party rule under Democrats would still have a lot of screaming and divide so it would certainly be no worse than the resulting divide that has occurred under someone who puts hard work as a last resort, even beyond a war without end.

[Drafted 7-27-05 before this link
Roger Larson

The above link I stumbled on today. But it reminded me to post this draft I had saved. The link is about the breakup of the unions and whether it is for the best. I'm not sure I can answer that but only will summarize my above post as follows: One party rule might not be that bad, as long as it is not the trickle down Republicans. It would be OK if it was the "Up the Filter" Democrats for they would still have a "healthy" debate. In fact, is not that the true spirit of competition if not evolution?

Air of Inevitability?

I do not wish to imply that it SHOULD BE, Clinton versus Thompson.
Only that if it is, that it BE a rehash of Watergate.
They both have their baggage from that era.
Thompson just noted
Hillary here:
TimesOnLine
TheStar.com

[Posted at the listed time, but continued immediately with the noted pause below]
GuardianUnlimited

TheVastRightWingCon

I am just trying to be "fair and balanced", so I must note that I have not digested all of these sources, and should warn of the potential for food poisoning on the last item. But just [the teaser] of the just prior one is intriguing (paused to read that piece):
Hillary brought to book Watergate veteran Carl Bernstein talks to James Silver about the Clintons, George Bush, and the state of the American press
Having now read it, it is recommended highly.

Just what is the difference between the "vast right wing conspiracy" and the so-called "liberal press"? Only the label. Just what is the difference between trying to rewrite the rules of impeachment and the constitution? Apparently the party and getting away with it.

[Finally concluding approximately 1 hour from original post time: normally I do not note when a post is developed in this manner.(in a sitting) But I also now proceed and borrow from the top link that:

The 2008 Race could not only rehash accountability but the media's role

I would change that to SHOULD!]

[Updated Presidential Profile: 9:20 AM - Noting that I have not put much attention to the ratings of the candidates, I now update without comment, but with an aversion to inevitability.

Kucinich
Edwards
Obama
Clark
Richardson
Clinton, Dodd, Biden
Gravel]

Mobius File*

NFRY
Some source to address the popular vote claim of Hillary Clinton.

RealClearPolitics: Democratic Delegate Count**
Newsweek: (~) The problem with popular math.
VoteForAmerica.net
PoliticusUsa ~ the flaw

*not quite circular file
**oops!  the only real 2016 source here
preemptive conclusion: We aren't there yet. 

4-15-16 The right candidates[!]  Too File.

4-19-16  Not my usual geometrics.

4-23-16 Washington Post: Delegate Reference

New Hampshire Defeat?

Or Win for progressives?[or change *]
This is my flash analysis prefaced by the note that I have only had a quick glance to go on. I have not even opened the link but looking at only the top three in each race. Literally:
Results at a glance The Seattle Times
Hillary Clinton (D)39%
Barack Obama (D)36%
John Edwards (D)17%
96% reporting

John McCain (R)37%
Mitt Romney (R)32%
Mike Huckabee (R)11%
96% reporting

My point is that without getting into the technicality that New Hampshire is a primary compared to the Iowa caucuses and the game metaphor that this is like a World Series, not like the NFL championships where they play "loser out"; for a second there I thought I almost lost it in paraphrasing, in that neither of these cases are one on one, (dot, dot, dot... pause) anyway -- the point: I guess I got to the point in my second line, and you can do the math.

And if you can't I will be glad to continue in that, I am presuming that it is not winner take all in New Hampshire and that Obama and Edwards voters add up to 53% of the assigned delegates. If I am wrong, well you know what they say about what happens if you presume. Just like assume, you make a pres out of u and me. OK that goes over better on the screen than it does aloud, but you get the gist. Or Rather, we get to be the butt of the joke.

[Updated References:
a.) the data which I removed from an OpEdNews posting was in the teaser portion of the Seattle Times which I did not grab a hotlink from, because I felt it would continue to be updated.
b.) the following morning I did open the link I provided and found the entire results and followed up on my punditry but doing a Google on [New Hampshire delegates determined] and found
The New York Times Election Guide "Delegates determined after all votes are in."
c.) my intention for those that need hints, was to make a pun on the process not the candidates or the parties, given that it is more of a horse race. *
d.) not that metaphors or data are copyrighted, but I did want a shot at following OpEdNews.com
guidelines, so dropping the actual data and links was convenient. Although the bottom link is now added, but as yet unread.
e.)finally The Stephanie Miller Show played Barack using a basketball metaphor but I do not know if an earlier article had made it to my filter or head space, I do recall using "post-up" in my stand-up work...out. ]

[ * 1-10-08: two changes - - "progressives" to "change" meaning Obama appears to be progressive, but Edwards seems to be the leader in that area and "horse race" to NASCAR "Title Chase Challenge" as it has more contests than the Triple Crown.]

Hillary Clinton Announces Run

Off to Iowa.

4-29-15
"criminal justice reform"

SerioUS Syria or ...

Rush 'n Delay?
Not Exactly !

[Breaking* News! (update** here*)]

* during NewsNation(Hillary Clinton on Syria)
**Jane Harman on Andrea Mitchell 9-6-13

[Here is to Harm 'n Knee!]
{later from The Cycle: Fawaz Gerges here.}

What's so funny...

about journalism?
Comedy Central? The Take Down.

[5-18-09: about Flip-flop, and intelligence.]
[I believe it was Hillary Clinton that said that leading the Democrats was like herding cats. Well then what is herding Republicans? That is a good ship riddle.]
[I think I will take this time to harbor my Swift boating. There is still a riddle to be caught but...]

An Open Letter

Keeping with my intention to be on sabbatical/spring break/spring cleaning of the soul, I have kept with my policy of fully reading (or viewing) all new links which I post unless noted (nnr) - which are few, and usually retroactive links. (or like bottom Link - and Nader - index or blog )

Including this:
An Open Letter - from Ralph Nader

And see this YouTube:
Road Trip!!!

and note new label.(search this blog: "Nader" till I update labels)

[BARACK OBAMA and HILLARY CLINTON
(from Amy Goodman of DemocracyNow.org)
as seen by RALPH NADER]
[Best of the Left. from GoLeft.TV (3-30-08.) ]
[The Raw Roundup from GoLeft.TV and RawStory (3-29-08). ]
[And finally Updated 3-31-08
The Sunday Funnies, Not for the PC.
Headzup Cartoons on GoLeft.TV (3-30-08). ]

Loose Lips and Sinking Metaphors

Footnotes PAGE Under Construction:

1-25-12

From loose lips to sinking ships. The Last Word hits the nail on the arc. Actually that is not the nail, but lip schtick, was on the horizon. It regards the history of the Republican Taxpolicy visa-vi debt policy. Not to mention Paw-lenty of Pie and Metaphor On.

1-26-12 [spin off of above...]

On the horizon, from G.H.W. Bush's "read my lips" to Bruce Bartlett's point: "1990 is the last time you had a leading Republican figure or President who cared about the deficit..." It is ironic he points out that the US is under the lowest tax burden in history compared to GDP.

More on Pit Bullies, in con text. Not that the gap in context is part of the con text, but the in con text(links) provide tripartite context**. In less embedded prose, bully for the Clemons piece, the Austrian pitting of Obama/Brewer, in relation to the Bush years, Iran con, and economics texting. While the final con text is the Standard and Pours[!] of the Neo-perspectivism on flip-flop and nuance. One try angle, another try angle. Not to call an odd man out, nor 4wo***man, but under the con I(above)ran a Just Foreign Policy sample, that takes a look at the dynamics of diplomacy. *

* not to be fair and balanced, nor brush off or in women,

the last three links reference; Hillary Clinton, Joan Walsh and Susan Rice.

** there by allowing 3 links to follow the pit bullies dynamics (2+3=5)

*** not to con grew an arc

(I plead the 5th in regard to irony[!])

[1-27-12: Related irony or booked signing?]

< previous post >

In Principle

the proposed cooperation (joint missile defense system) between Putin and Bush is interesting. The last word is from Bush who finds the offer "interesting", the first two are from Hillary Clinton who does not oppose missile defense "in principle". But that does not mean it is likely to proceed or advisable to move forward with or without cooperation, for cause. Just like non-proliferation has not proceeded very well along side advances in weapons research and production, missile defense will be seen as offensive, especially with preemption as a policy. If cooperation cannot succeed in diplomatic pressure, it is not likely to work well under escalation.

UPDATE ONLY?

Barack Obama gave the following speech
on March 18th, 2008
which has come to be know as:
"a more perfect union"? **
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
U P D A T E . B E L O W (SEE BREAK)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

A great speech which I challenge anyone with a heart to listen to.
And for those who prefer to read
the text: in his own words.
or my peremptory comments here.
Obama is right, now what will others write? Never mind.
[Obama Explains Wright, Will McCain Explain the Far Right? 3-18-08]

As far as The Day After... and speechless:
Five years ago that day the war began.
Honor the dead and fighting, by hard work.
But belated? another speech.
[The Day After...3-19-08]

[BTW: articulated throwing under the bus? No Joke: 11-8-02 not update but a back draft, whiffed at by Ed Schultz today. My further update in the next hour as far as going far enough: a caller wanted to move on from race because of her fears of the dialogue* and its circular nature, but that is why Obama should be heard over and over in order to get through to the herd that are only sheep. Thanks to Cheryl and the process.]

* she is right about the media that feeds the dialogue and the sheep, but the only food is the proper light to face it head on. A ram charger, not to dodge or forget the ewe.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
H A P P Y WholeEday: [3-26-08]
I will be on sabbatical and hope to limit my postings to here.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

[UPDATE 3-22-08: Media Moment: Billed...]

** UPDATE 3-24-08: Having updated this intro to the speech,(another link) I will encourage that it be read and reread or reviewed. And further that its title as it will come to be know by, will direct people in just that review of our history.
McSane Speech (Marjorie Cohn) or McSame BuSh (only worse)
The New Wave (see Wave LABEL)
The Ed Schultz Show and thanks to caller Jeff
for an inspiring speech in defense of pews on Where America comes to talk.
A Tribute to McCain: So Plain - - In Spain,
Raining McCain - - A Good Sense of Trickle Down.(And math and English "24/7" in particular 3-4-08?)
McCain gives response "to that heart felt statement"
of his and mine and the old GOP.
And tort reform from Hillary? Not exactly.
QCON: Working group a good idea,
but link of war to economy is key. Reform of system that puts investor profits and executive bailouts over failure of so-called free markets, may be a pincer attack that Obama and Clinton can perform on the trickle-down. Meanwhile as far as pressure to get out of Iraq, remembering who the commander-in-chief is, not that he should get his way, but his way of getting out may be hampered by who he and his crowd are. They could leave a disaster as bad as they believe it will be, because they can or rather because they are unwilling to do what might work. Putting the war on the books is a start. (Thanks to Rachell Maddow and David Bender for this QCON linking in my mind, and Fox for Hillary and The New York Times for Krugman)

[3-25-08: Till further notice all links will be completely read prior to inclusion unless noted. The previous two have now been read, and the linkage made seems supported. As to earlier links, I may be cherry picking, but I don't rip off the branch or chop down the tree, or push the pits.
(Seemingly apropos to the following already posted and read.) ]
[ Bush "comma" 4000, "Say Goodnight, Gracie" "Sadly.."
(hint: scroll over links, read "4000," first) ]
[ McCain: "We're succeeding. I don't care what anybody says.
I've seen the facts on the ground," (Period)?
And a look back: links not necessarily read - (nnr) . ]
(Note: new notation during this segue/sabbatical,
except for retroactive exception of Gracie link )
[Note: error found in post, 6-29-06 - link (nnr). ]

[3-26-08: Only link inserted above referencing Easter ]
[ Responsible Plan presented by Darcy Burner to Take Back America Conference ][also noted at Politickerwa.com ]
[ Five years is long enough: A week and The Day After....]

[3-27-08: Supreme Court Rules Bush Exceeded His Powers]
An odd light on the roots of law which
which need to feed the branches of Government.]

[3-28-08: Federal Judge: Michigan's Presidential Primary Law Unconstitutional -
NPR News: National Pentagon Radio? -
Lhasa Monks Accuse Beijing of Lying Over Unrest -
Process, Process, Process. ??? ]
[Political Intelligence Disclosure Act to open insider market influence? and other
Updates in a look back ]

Attorney General Gonzalez Retreats.

Congratulations Congressman Inslee.

The people have prevailed and more thanks to Daily KOS early on.

The New York Times was of help and the other Dems.
technical difficulties and other work keeps this brief
= = = = = = = =

Did Hillary Shoot Dems in the Foot?
In snooze mode this AM I heard something about a False Flag charge on the Stephanie Miller Show> Could it be this on the politics of fear? The political calculus is the fear at Rock the Truth as well.
On the strength of the comments from Democratic candidates they rate in the following order.
Kucinich: no comment. Already tough enough, already standing up.
Richardson
Edwards
Dodd
Obama: no comment?
Clinton
Standing up for what? Impeachment is the only way.
Standing up now is the way to tell who will stand up as President or is political calculus just using ones toes?

OK! This brief ramble is just about not falling for the Republican meme. Getting the message out that Democrats are not the problem and any problems will be the Republicans. Of course even in retreat, Bush blames the Democrats. See first story. Hence the need to pursue continued investigations and not let anyone off the hook.

The Big Tent vs. The Mess Tent in the Bush Bubble Error (err Era)

= = = = = = = =

Bush History Flip-FLop:
Vietnam, Korea or Japan

= = = = = = = =

What has happened.

Hitting Snooze Button

Meme or and um.

Just a little stepping back on the previous post of mine. First: it is always in the words that you find what you Google. Second: then they must still be filtered.

[ 8-20-07 * * * SEE PREVIOUS WARNING: CLICK AT YOUR OWN RISK! * * * Wake Up America * * * ] caught my interest, and hit some spots that were familiar and where I often go.

The particular page on Rove and Hillary along with the new filter as I note above, Meme or and um , spells it all out. But I still have a ways to go, and it is not that clear where it is coming from. All I can say is that it is a filter. What it fertilizes is still up to the "hard work" of the people. Which is something I need to get back to... later.

[Heck: Oh and I did not even read the reference to language [8-20-07 * * * CLICK AT OWN RISK (in comments to Wake Up America) * * * ]
and ended mine on vocabulary,
but "there I go again". [[11:08 AM Re: Bill Clinton as a cuss word versus Cheney a pardon for such, is just a hint at a difference in perspectives, which I had missed earlier. "Pardon my Cheney" as in "Pardon my French."]]
Here I will preemptively hit the nail on the head.
Mother Jones, you see hints at the point in the title. Alleged White House-Petraeus Arm Wrestling Over September Report a Ruse? At least that is my point. And TYT. From other source or my general filtering, Patraeus is dancing around "the turd blossoms" of information and politics. Now I will read the report.-
Now that I have, it comports with my opinion and the facts. One thing that must be remembered, there is no obligation to tell the truth to anyone in the media. Even the media has the right to lie. And apparently in this case there may be two stories ** both in public and behind closed doors. And this goes directly back to troop involvement with the facts and whether their opinions matter, whether they are in or out of the military.]

[10:37 AM - My initial impression needs to be filtered, as now I see that Wake Up America has a perspective that still needs more sorting...]

** This is already being denied.

Tangents from Angler

From the Now-disclosed Bunker Branch lead link.
Authorization For Use of Military Force
Military Commissions PO
Terrorists Not POW

"Pushing the Envelope" Chapter II
War Crimes Act
Memorandum on Standards... "prohibits only the worst".
Tortured Memo
Warner Administration Policies

Gonzalez Memorandum to the President

This was a little deeper and less sorted than I intended, but I must move on.

But Echoes of Watergate:
What did the president know and when did he know it?

But I would ask: What did the president not know and when did he let Cheney know he did not want to know it?
There is more embedded history or future here. [*] The fact that Hillary was a lawyer advising during Watergate as was Fred Thompson.

If the 2004 election was a rehashing of Vietnam, then the 2008 rehash may be about Watergate, if it is Clinton v. Thompson.

[8-11-07: link below added]

[*] [8-12-07: foward link below and more added there, I must note that what tipped me to this loop is lost or found by further review, but possible just luck or making sense or trying to dig into what someone said, quite likely on, given the time of the original post... The Stephanie Miller Show, but I further note that the recent additions of links were just found and dated in the days following my original post. ] Today 9:55 AM]
[Note: Throughout this blog any [] bracketed material is usually an indication and dated such of an amendment to a link, and no other temporal funny business or editing of posts occur, except minor grammar and spelling. 8-12-07]
[What I am saying above is that I would love to know where the Nixon mole story leaked into my filter. Now 10:03 AM]