Recall Senator "Peeping Pat" Roberts!!

[pat_k]

There can be no compromise between putting a stop to an ongoing criminal enterprise and aiding criminals in the commission of their crimes. Although states don't have a statutory mechanism to recall members of the United States Congress, Kansans can demand resignation through petition and local resolution.

Resolution Regarding Senator Pat Roberts

Whereas;
As Chairman of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Senator Pat Roberts has made it impossible for the committee "to provide vigilant legislative oversight over the intelligence activities of the United States to assure that such activities are in conformity with the Constitution and laws of the United States."

Through action and omission, Senator Pat Roberts has obstructed the investigation of activities that fall within the jurisdiction of the Select Committee on Intelligence and no other. Specifically, Senator Roberts has consistently obstructed efforts to investigate executive branch activities that involve serious charges against George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, and other executive branch officials, including, but not limited to:

50 USC Sec. 1809--Unauthorized Surveillance
18 USC Sec. 844(e) Bomb threat (Mushroom Clouds in 45 Minutes)
18 USC Sec. 35 Bomb Hoax
18 USC Sec. 2441--War Crimes

And whereas;
George W. Bush's "early warning system"/criminal surveillance program may involve criminal activities and violations of privacy that were formerly part of the Total Information Awareness program -- a program that was unequivocally rejected by the people of the United States of American who demanded that Congress put an end to the program -- there is no doubt that, at a minimum, George W. Bush's program of surveillance of Americans without a warrant under color of authority violates 50 USC Sec. 1809--Unauthorized Surveillance.

And whereas;
Senator Pat Roberts abused his position as chairman to prevent the Select Committee on Intelligence from investigating the scope of the George W. Bush's criminal surveillance program as required to "assure that such activities are in conformity with the Constitution and laws of the United States."

Rather than leading the investigation to expose and end the criminal program as required by his position, Senator Roberts colluded with the perpetrators to develop a scheme to (1) ensure that the program is never investigated and (2) provide a mechanism by which the criminal activity, whatever its full scope may be, can continue.

In obstructing the investigation of a known crime, Senator Pat Roberts became an accessory to that crime after the fact.

In participating in the scheme to continue the criminal program, Senator Pat Roberts became an accomplice.

And whereas;
Senator Pat Roberts has repeatedly abused the power entrusted him by the people of Kansas to aid and abet George W. Bush's efforts to conceal the extent of his criminal surveillance program and conspire to ensure George W. Bush could continue a criminal surveillance program of unknown scope.

Therefore, be it resolved;
That the people of _________________ County Kansas call for the immediate resignation of Senator Pat Roberts.

Be it further resolved;
That true copies of this resolution will be delivered to Senator Pat Roberts, the Wichita Eagle, and the leadership of the United States Senate.

_______________County Kansas
Agreed to this XX day of Month, 2006

At a minimum, George W. Bush's surveillance of Americans without a warrant under color of authority violates 50 USC Sec. 1809--Unauthorized Surveillance.

Three years ago, Americans unequivocally rejected the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program and demanded that Congress kill it. The executive branch slapped on new labels and kept it alive (TIA Lives On, 23-Feb-06, National Journal). In so doing, they violated the principle on which our nation was founded -- the consent of the governed.

Unless independent investigation proves otherwise, Americans have to assume that Bush's "early warning system"/criminal surveillance is using the systems formerly known as "TIA" to violate our right to privacy and comb through masses of our emails, phone calls, purchases, banking transactions, Internet usage, and other personal data.

If Senator "Peeping Pat" Roberts gets his way, Americans will never learn magnitude or scope of the violations against them.

Instead of investigating and seeking to stop crimes in progress as required by his position as Chairman of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Roberts is creating a "terrorist surveillance subcommittee" that will politely ask known liars and criminals to give them "full access to the details of the program's operations" and to "to seek a warrant from the court whenever possible." (quotes from G.O.P. Senators Say Accord Is Set on Wiretapping, NY Times, 8-Mar-06)

Undoubtedly claims of "national security" will gag the members of the new subcommittee and make it a crime for them to publicly demand information Bush withholds or publicly object to anything they discover in the course of their "work."

Last month, the Wichita Eagle concluded this about Roberts' previous actions, "That's not oversight -- it's looking the other way." (Roberts' Credibility on the Line" 18-Feb-06)

When the chairman of the Senate intelligence committee knows that officials at the highest levels are violating our laws, but chooses to "look the other way" he isn't just being derelict in his duty, he is abusing his power to cover up an ongoing criminal enterprise. He is an accessory after the fact.

Referring to Robert's apparent intention to do whatever he could to enable Bush to continue, and perhaps even expand, his violations of existing laws, the NY Times complained that "The last thing the nation needs is to amend the law to institutionalize the imperial powers Mr. Bush seized after 9/11." (Doing the President's Dirty Work, 17-Feb-06)

"Peeping Pat" Roberts has now followed though on his intentions. To formulate the details, Roberts conspired with knowing participants in a criminal enterprise to cover-up and continue that enterprise. He has become more than an accessory after the fact. He is now a party to the crime -- an accomplice.

BTW, granting cover for 45 days at a time is nothing but a transparent attempt to give the plan the appearance of "oversight." Setting a five year time limit on the scheme shows an unmistakable consciousness of guilt. If Roberts and his conspirators intended protect our rights, they would not have designed something that covers only criminal acts already in progress and that expires when the criminals expect to move on.

Recall "Peeping Pat" Roberts!!

The NY Times complaint that "this is the last thing we need" does not go far enough. Complaint cannot hold "Peeping Pat" accountable for his criminal abuse of power. It is time for the people of Kansas to act and for the nation to get behind them.

Background on Kansas

Kansas does not have state-level ballot initiative/referendum or recall (which would only apply to state elected officials anyway). County and city resolution or petitions for recall/resignation are an option.

Resolutions by local Republican or Democratic Party organizations could be a first step.

Don't count out Republicans. I doubt the Wichita Eagle could be characterized as a liberal rag. Their editorial (cited above) reflects the growing anger with unprincipled and immoral Republican action. Pat Roberts' actions are wrong by any standard and Republicans do not hesitate to accuse and demand punishment for perceived wrongs.

About half of the state's population is concentrated in four counties:

Sedgwick County (pop 500,000), which includes Wichita city, Kansas (350,000)
Johnson County (pop 500,000), which Olathe (pop 100,000) and Overland Park (150,000)
Shawnee County (pop 175,000), which includes Topeka (125,000)
Wyandotte County (pop 170,000), which includes Kansas City, (150,000)

===============================================================
Note on NY Times article

The authors, David Kirkpatrick and Scott Shane, abandoned their role as journalists and reported that Roberts' scheme would reinforce the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court." There is no conceivable argument that the scheme constitutes anything other than an attempt to restrict the jurisdiction of the FISA court and provide cover for executive branch intelligence activities that are currently crimes under the FISA act.

The NY Times needs to hear from us.