Of particular interest to me were the statements by ranking committee member Rep. Lamar Smith of the 21st District of Texas. According to Representative Smith, not only did he not believe that the Bush Administration and its cohorts in crime had committed any crimes worthy of investigation, he felt the hearings themselves were shameful and a waste of time.

Apparently Mr. Smith has either been in a coma for the last seven years, or is blissfully ignorant not only of what has transpired during this time but the affect these years have had not only on our civil liberties but also what it has cost us as a nation in blood and tears.

Mr. Smith seemed not at all impressed with the facts that more than a million Iraqi's have been slaughtered in this war for oil and greed, along with 4,127 American military men and women and that these deaths and this carnage was brought about by the lies of the worst president and administration we have ever had to endure as a nation. Mr. Smith indicated that the president had committed no impeachable offenses.

That this supposed representative of a Texas district could make such statements with a straight face was a shock to the senses of anyone who had paid any attention at all to the illegal activities and actions of this administration since 2001.

Two panels were seated during this inquiry, and on the second was a gentleman named Jeremy Rabkin. Mr. Rabkin is a professor of law at George Mason University although how this man managed to obtain such employment must be a mystery.

Professor Rabkin was brought in as a witness apparently to bolster the neo-con position that it's only a crime if a non global elitist does it. What a pitiful example of the neo-con mindset this man is.

In what I can only describe as one of the most overly animated, gesticulating, face contorting diatribes I have ever witnessed, Professor Rabkin loudly proclaimed that the mood of the people in the room was "demented"-. (I found it to be quite passive and docile until he himself began raging.) It would seem, according to the professor, that anyone in the room or out of the room who believed that impeachable offenses had been committed were deranged.

While this neo-con buffoon did everything but physically jump on the desk and twist his body into the shape of a pretzel he presented not one shred of legal expertise to support his contention that there was no offense. Far from coming off as a legal expert on Constitutional law, or any law at all for that matter, the professor seemed more to be auditioning for the Gong Show.

Mr. Rabkin's appearance must have been more for distraction than for substance. It was distracting and also quite uncomfortable to watch.

So, has the president committed any impeachable offenses? Let me count the ways! Illegal spying and wiretapping, data mining on US citizens, manipulating intelligence to attack Iraq, launching a pre-emptive war of aggression, kidnapping and disappearing of foreign nationals, secret prisons, torture, signing statements directing departments and agencies not to abide by the law, claiming powers not delegated to the executive, issuing executive orders contrary to constitutional law, declaring himself above the common law, illegal imprisonment, holding prisoners without charges, the intentional genocide of the Iraqi people for the benefit and gain of multinational oil cartels, corruption of the Department of Justice, attempting to launch yet another war of aggression by provoking Iran, entering into the Security & Prosperity Partnership intended to dissolve our sovereign nation, failing to secure our southern border from illegal invasion, and mounting an unmitigated War OF Terror against the American people. This is the short list.

So what do you think, Mr. Smith? Mr. Rabkin? Can you look at this short list of offenses and still claim that nothing here is indicative of impeachable offenses?

These two gentlemen were surely not the only ones on the committee or panels who feigned indignation at the mere thought that anyone might want to hold this administration accountable, but they are the two who stood out, especially Mr. Rabkin whose head I thought was surely going to explode at one point if it didn't break away from his body totally and spin across the room.

This may come as a shock to these gentlemen, but the American public has come to its own conclusions about this administration and its activities, and it was no thanks to either of you or people like you. It is after viewing such things as this hearing today, that I find myself wondering how Mr. Smith and Mr. Rabkin have continued to hold any position at all as both seem to be either clueless or so dedicated to the dead elephant in the room, the herd passed by them unnoticed

And the elephant is dead for all intents and purposes. Yet, as today showed us, there are still those who believe that the neo-con tactics of distortion, manipulation, stonewalling, ranting and over-acting are still clung to by a few who refuse to admit the American people have tired of these antics, are no longer amused by them, and no longer sucked in by them.

Today also exposed one other thing; there is still a number of people willing to forfeit our country, our Constitution, our lives, rather than defend and protect the Constitution of the United States and our laws, as long as there is some benefit for them in doing so, whether hidden or overt. For these individuals, party affiliation, political pandering and inclusion in what can only be described as an anti-American movement is far more important than preserving our nation and protecting not only our government, but its people as well, from a cabal dedicated to seeing it destroyed.

 1  |  2