Momentum Building For Bugliosi's Case Against George W. Bush For Murder »
Posted by: jovial 2 months ago158 Comments Report this Story
For Vincent Bugliosi, one of America's foremost prosecutors and authors, George W. Bush's purposeful crime of misleading America into war is a vile, despicable and prosecutable act. It angers Bugliosi deeply. So much so that he's written a new book, "The Prosecution Of George W. Bush For Murder."
Read Full Story at opednews.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 158
-
0%
jovial2 months ago
FTA:
"I want to state that in writing this book my motivation was not political. Whether I'm giving a final summation to the jury or writing one of my true crime books, credibility has always meant everything to me. Therefore, my only master - my only mistress - are the facts and objectivity. And this is why I can give you a 100% guarantee that if a Democratic president had done what George W. Bush did, I would have written the same exact book."
Reply-
-
0%
DukeOhara2 months ago
Indeed, you are by no means alone in such sentiments, just as "It angers Bugliosi deeply" here as author/prosecutor, likewise it seems for most Americans along with so many other citizens of the world who will also agree, that judicial hearings and prosecution cases should be in order and brought to bare in earnest.
Has there ever been any comparable American politician (or any criminal for that matter) so deeply loathed by so many the world over to such an extent, that it is commonly expressed, even from among school aged children up to gr.grand-parents, the dire wish to see "extraordinary" and extreme penalty of justice be executed upon such an alleged "murderous" ONE "(along with his henchmen)"?
Reply
-
-
0%
Poulenc2 months ago
Amazon link to the book:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/159315481X/ref...
Though very sympathetic to the premise, one question I have is, can Bush be prosecuted for lying (unless perjury, not a crime), especially in light of the fact that Congress authorized the use of force in Iraq?
But then, we're talking about two exclusive acts....
Reply-
0%
jovial2 months ago
Fraud overrides consent. He addressed that issue in the one of the youtube videos in the post. Here's the link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbcoPShwvtM
I think the term he used was visciates.
Reply -
0%
donald512 months ago
pou, that was a deceived and intimidated Congress that believed common sence would never result in an actual invasion... even Dumys'a dad knew enough not to occupy Iraq!
Reply
-
-
0%
bubba22 months ago
I hope that Bugliosi can do something or get enough people in power to do something, because Congress is just as bad as Bush anymore.
Even the Democrats - except for a few that have attempted to try to do the right thing - are just as pathetic and crooked as the Republicans currently there and the Republicans they replaced.
It is beyond disgusting. Money controls everything - even elections and who can even RUN for an office.
95% of the people in this country are being screwed and I just don't know, at this point, how it can be stopped.
Reply -
-
0%
jovial2 months ago
Yes, I think that was what he was implying. I think what he was saying that the fraud of not including the entire intelligence to the Congress by omission vitiates the Congress of wrongdoing and puts the blame right back on the Bush Administration.
Reply -
-
0%
foksipayne2 months ago
Also there are probably some who KNEW what it meant, but will deny knowledge, considering what they know now.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
jovial2 months ago
Thanks, Poulenc. I also would like for to you to read (at your leisure) this NY times article. It sets the basis for this type of association. Let's go back in time... There was a scandal brewing in Washington. The president at that time Was Ronald Reagan.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=...
"The Congressional committees on the Iran-contra affair blamed President Reagan in their final report today for failing to live up to his constitutional mandate to ''take care that the laws be faithfully executed'' and said he bore ''the ultimate responsibility'' for wrongdoing by his aides."
Reply -
0%
donald512 months ago
Pou, you ask if he is personally liable... does the buck not stop at his desk? We elected him (at least 51% of foolish America did) and he chose all the freaking losers ans liars that work for him.... he is absolutely and untimately responsible!
Reply
-
-
0%
Poulenc2 months ago
OK, it appears that "getting" Bush would work jurisdictionally; that is, B. believes that there's a set jurisdictional basis for attorneys general in each of the fifty states, plus "hundreds of district attorneys," to prosecute Bush for the murder of any soldier from their state or counties killed fighting in "Bush's war."
Or maybe there's more than one MO.
Hmmm. Still need to research this further....
Reply -
0%
Poulenc2 months ago
...in which case, Bush wouldn't be tried for lying per se, but for murder as a RESULT of lying....
Reply -
0%
Poulenc2 months ago
OK, this from an article in the Nation:
Bugliosi: "So what I'm talking about here is very real. I've established jurisdiction in this book for prosecutors on a state or federal level to go after President Bush. With the literally hundreds of prosecutors out there and the powerful evidence of guilt I've set out, it's hard to believe there's not at least one prosecutor, maybe more, courageous enough to say this is America, and in America no man is above the law...."
Reply -
0%
donald512 months ago
If the CIA can refer the outing of one of their agents to the Bush Justice Department only to have her eventual civil case thrown out... then only a Dem president can right the ship in the Justice Department to see any real justice.
The Bush Justice department has persued only reverse discrimination cases, stonewalled every case of reported contractor fraud and abuse from overseas, allowed Blackwater immunity to kill innocents, fired repug prosecutors who went after both Dems and Repugs, failed to back any Dem Congress subpoenas/contempt charges, allowed tortore contrary to Geneva, allowed eavedropping contrary to the FISA law, and allowed American contractor women (at least 24 now) to be raped without justice in the Green Zone.
Oh, how we can thank those values voters for Dumya!
Reply -
0%
Poulenc2 months ago
(Donald, glad you see...saw eventually...that we argue on the same side....)
Reply -
0%
foksipayne2 months ago
try him. Why not? If he's not guilty, he has nothing to worry about. I don't care if it takes 8 years to get him in court. He should not go unpunished just because his term ends.
Reply -
0%
kedirian2 months ago
In the face of Congress' failure to live up to their collective oaths, ONE citizen can defend the Constitution by bringing this Un-American President to Justice - along with his guru and his henchmen!
Reply -
0%
silvera2 months ago
I've always thought of Vincent Bugliosi as a grandstanding, self-promoting gasbag. BUT, if he can pull this off he'll go right to the top of my list as a true American hero. G.W. Bush needs to be held accountable for so many things that the "759 characters" I have left here would not begin to do them justice. Life without parole, at the very least for the miserable, wretched little man.
Reply -
0%
OldHickory2 months ago
I am far from being a defender for King George but let's be realistic. If you're going to indict him for Iraq, then how about condemning Truman for Korea and Kennedy for Viet Nam. It seems like the radlibs forget that Congress was also complicit in the decision. Before you start impeaching anybody you need a crash course in the way government works in this country. Getting involved in a land war in Asia was not a unilateral decision and when BO claims he will bring the troops home he is pandering to the naivete and emotions of those too ignorant to realize the vacuum that would be created in that part of the world by removing America's presence indiscriminately.
Semper fi.
Reply -
0%
bubba22 months ago
The Republicans taught us the way government works in this country in the 1990s when they tried to impeach Bill Clinton for lying about his sex life.
Yet you say that Bush cannot be impeached for lying about starting a war?? Baloney!
Truman is dead and Kennedy is dead. But if you want to posthumously indict them, feel free.
Bush and Cheney are alive and well while millions of Iraqis are homeless, dead, diseased, maimed, and living in poverty, and thousands of our soldiers are dead while tens of thousands of others are maimed for the rest of their lives. ALL of that damage is a result of the LIES of Bush and his cronies.
Reply-
0%
svensun2 months ago
Right, Bubba2, SEXUAL HARRASSMENT is now defined, BY YOU, as part of one's sex life?!?!?!?
Never heard of Paula Jones, did you?
Never knew she had filed a sexual harrassment lawsuit against your boy, Bubba1, did you?
Never had the time to read a bit and learn that Bubba1 LIED while being deposed for THAT SEXUAL HARRASSMENT lawsuit, did you?
'lying about his sex life'?
Get a clue, will you.
Reply-
0%
bubba22 months ago
NO prosecution ever occurred regarding Paula Jones, and that was BEFORE Clinton was President.
YOU get a clue.
Did I say that lying about one's sex life is OK? NO!
Is lying about one's sex life an "impeachable offense"? NO!
Is lying about reasons to start a war - in which hundreds of thousands of people are KILLED - an impeachable offense?
YES!
You have absolutely NO sense of perspective or of right and wrong.
Reply
-
-
