IRS Audited Greenpeace At Request of ExxonMobil-Funded Group

Democracy Now! | IRS Audited Greenpeace At Request of ExxonMobil-Funded Group: "Friday, March 24th, 2006

The Wall Street Journal revealed this week a little-known watchdog group was responsible for getting the IRS to audit the environmental organization Greenpeace. Two years ago, Public Interest Watch challenged Greenpeace's tax-exempt status and accused the group of money laundering and other crimes. According to the Journal, tax records show more than 95 percent of the funding of Public Interest Watch was provided by the oil giant ExxonMobil.

On its website, Public Interest Watch says it was founded "in response to the growing misuse of charitable funds by nonprofit organizations and the lack of effort by government agencies to deal with the problem." The group describes its mission as: "Keeping an Eye on the Self-Appointed Guardians of the Public Interest." ...

Former DeLay Aide Enriched By Nonprofit

Former DeLay Aide Enriched By Nonprofit: "Bulk of Group's Funds Tied to Abramoff | By R. Jeffrey Smith | Washington Post Staff Writer | Sunday, March 26, 2006; A01

A top adviser to former House Whip Tom DeLay received more than a third of all the money collected by the U.S. Family Network, a nonprofit organization the adviser created to promote a pro-family political agenda in Congress, according to the group's accounting records.

DeLay's former chief of staff, Edwin A. Buckham, who helped create the group while still in DeLay's employ, and his wife, Wendy, were the principal beneficiaries of the group's $3.02 million in revenue, collecting payments totaling $1,022,729 during a five-year period ending in 2001, public and private records show.

The group's revenue was drawn mostly from clients of Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, according to its records. From an FBI subpoena for the records, it can be inferred that the bureau is exploring whether there were links between the payments and favorable legislative treatment of Abramoff's clients by DeLay's office." ...

group questioned whether Barbara Bush should be allowed to channel donation to Neil Bush's Ignite Learning company thru Houston relief fund

Chron.com | Barbara Bush's Katrina donation ignites debate: "March 24, 2006, 1:30AM | HISD says focus on Neil Bush's software didn't violate policy | By JENNIFER RADCLIFFE | Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

As Barbara Bush spent two hours championing her son's software company at a Houston middle school Thursday morning, a watchdog group questioned whether the former first lady should be allowed to channel a donation to Neil Bush's Ignite Learning company through Houston's Hurricane Katrina relief fund.

'It's strange that the former first lady would want to do this. If her son's having a rough time of it, couldn't she write him a check?' said Daniel Borochoff, founder of the American Institute of Philanthropy, a Chicago-based charity watchdog group. 'Maybe she isn't aware that people could frown upon this.'

Some critics said donations to a tax-deductible charitable fund shouldn't benefit the Bush family. Others questioned whether the Houston Independent School District violated district policy by allowing the company to host a promotional event on campus."

New gov't data shows GOP pension bill would create severe crisis

Sirotablog: New gov't data shows GOP pension bill would create severe crisis: "3.23.06

Let's see...what do you do if you are the most corrupt, bought-off political party in history, and America's pension safety net is grossly underfunded at the very time more and more corporations are reneging on their pension promises? The answer is obvious: you use the crisis to pass new legislation that allows corporations to get out of their obligations to shore up that safety net. And that's exactly what the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress are doing, according to a new report by the Financial Times today.

This sounds ludicrous. It sounds ridiculous. It sounds like something out of a bad Saturday Night Live skit. But, I kid you not - this is exactly what's going on. Here's the excerpt:

'Employers will be able to slash their contributions to underfunded pension schemes by tens of billions of dollars over the next five years under proposed legislation before Congress that was expected to have the opposite effect. The legislation was proposed by the White House last year to lessen the risk of a taxpayer bailout of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, a federal safety net for pension schemes...Assuming an average corporate tax rate of 35 per cent, the data suggest a temporary but significant drop in employer payments into pension schemes over the next few years...Funding of pension schemes would reach a low ebb in 2008 under both versions.'

This is truly a new low, even for this White House. Here we have a major pension crisis unfolding right before our eyes. And the Bush administration and Republicans in Congress, by actually further weakening the system, are openly doing the bidding of the corporate interests that have created this crisis in the first place." ...

Barbara Bush donated an undisclosed amount to Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund with instructions that the money be spent with company owned by her son Neil

Chron.com | Katrina funds earmarked to pay for Neil Bush's software program: "March 23, 2006, 9:01PM | Former first lady's donation aids son | Katrina funds earmarked to pay for Neil Bush's software program | By CYNTHIA LEONOR GARZA | Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle

Former first lady Barbara Bush donated an undisclosed amount of money to the Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund with specific instructions that the money be spent with an educational software company owned by her son Neil.

Since then, the Ignite Learning program has been given to eight area schools that took in substantial numbers of Hurricane Katrina evacuees." ...

Pension bill , rather than strengthening the system, would actually weaken it, ower corporate contributions to the already underfiunded progam

Major Changes Raise Concerns on Pension Bill - New York Times: "By MARY WILLIAMS WALSH | Published: March 19, 2006

With a strong directive from the Bush administration, Congress set out more than a year ago to fashion legislation that would protect America's private pension system, tightening the rules to make sure companies set aside enough money to make good on their promises to employees.

Then the political horse-trading began, with lawmakers, companies and lobbyists, representing everything from big Wall Street firms to tiny rural electric cooperatives, weighing in on the particulars of the Bush administration's blueprint.

In the end, lawmakers modified many of the proposed rules, allowing companies more time to cover pension shortfalls, to make more forgiving estimates about how much they will owe workers in the future, and even sometimes to assume that their workers will die younger than the rest of the population.

On top of those changes, companies also persuaded lawmakers to add dozens of specific measures, including a multibillion-dollar escape clause for the nation's airlines and a special exemption for the makers of Smithfield Farms hams.

As a result, the bill now being completed in a House-Senate conference committee, rather than strengthening the pension system, would actually weaken it, according to a little-noticed analysis by the government's pension agency. The agency's report projects that the House and Senate bills would lower corporate contributions to the already underfinanced pension system by $140 billion to $160 billion in the next three years. ...

$2,000 was the maximum amount paid on nearly a dozen [CORPORATE FINES] penalties ranging from $86,500 to $180,000;

Excite News: "More Corporations Stiffing Gov't on Fines | Mar 18, 9:57 PM (ET) | By MARTHA MENDOZA and CHRISTOPHER SULLIVAN

When a gasoline spill and fiery explosion killed three young people in Washington state, officials announced a record penalty against a gas pipeline company: $3 million to send the message that such tragedies "must never happen again."

When nuclear labs around the country were found exposing workers to radiation and breaking other safety rules, assessments totaling $2.5 million were quickly ordered.

When coal firms' violations were blamed for deaths, injuries and risks to miners from Alabama to West Virginia, they were slapped with more than $1.3 million in penalties.

What happened next with these no-nonsense enforcement efforts? Not much. The pipeline tab was eventually reduced by 92 percent, the labs' assessments were waived as soon as they were issued, and the mine penalties largely went unpaid.

The amount of unpaid federal fines has risen sharply in the last decade. Individuals and corporations regularly avoid large, highly publicized penalties for wrongdoing - sometimes through negotiations, sometimes because companies go bankrupt, sometimes due to officials' failure to keep close track of who owes what under a decentralized collection system.

_The government is currently owed more than $35 billion in fines and other payments from criminals and in civil cases, according to Justice Department figures. This is almost five times the amount uncollected 10 years ago - and enough to cover the annual budget of the Department of Homeland Security. A decade ago, Congress mandated that fines be imposed regardless of defendants' ability to pay, which has added tremendously to outstanding debt.

_In 2004, federal authorities ordered $7.8 billion in 98,985 fines, penalties and restitution demands in criminal and civil cases, but collected less than half of that.

_White-collar crime cases account for the largest amount of uncollected debt. In a study, Government Accountability Office investigators found that just 7 percent of restitution in such cases is paid.

"Fines and orders to pay restitution are an important part of how we punish convicted criminals. When so little effort is made to collect that money, we allow convicted criminals to avoid punishment for their crimes, weaken our criminal justice system and ultimately deny justice to the victims of crimes," said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who has pressed for closer scrutiny for years.
...
Documents provided to the AP by the Labor Department's Employment Benefits Security Administration, whose job is to protect pension and welfare benefits, showed that $2,000 was the maximum amount paid on nearly a dozen penalties ranging from $86,500 to $180,000; these were for various kinds of violations, everything from failure to file reports to self-dealing by pension fund managers.

Why the reductions? Officials explained that compliance is the agency's goal, and that the law allows penalties to be reduced when companies make amends. Violators who don't comply risk being referred to the Treasury Department, which can collect by seizing federal benefits.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration's written policy explains to inspectors that they can reduce penalties by as much as 95 percent, "depending upon the employer's 'good faith,' (25 percent) 'size of business,' (60 percent) and 'history of previous violations.' (10 percent)"

Internal documents from U.S. Customs show that dramatically large fines may be cut sharply.

Agency documents released under AP's FOIA request listed, for example, a $60,911,316 "commercial fraud" assessment for one company - but the case ended with a $15,000 collection by Customs. ...

$2,000 was the maximum amount paid on nearly a dozen [CORPORATE FINES] penalties ranging from $86,500 to $180,000;

Excite News: "More Corporations Stiffing Gov't on Fines | Mar 18, 9:57 PM (ET) | By MARTHA MENDOZA and CHRISTOPHER SULLIVAN

When a gasoline spill and fiery explosion killed three young people in Washington state, officials announced a record penalty against a gas pipeline company: $3 million to send the message that such tragedies "must never happen again."

When nuclear labs around the country were found exposing workers to radiation and breaking other safety rules, assessments totaling $2.5 million were quickly ordered.

When coal firms' violations were blamed for deaths, injuries and risks to miners from Alabama to West Virginia, they were slapped with more than $1.3 million in penalties.

What happened next with these no-nonsense enforcement efforts? Not much. The pipeline tab was eventually reduced by 92 percent, the labs' assessments were waived as soon as they were issued, and the mine penalties largely went unpaid.

The amount of unpaid federal fines has risen sharply in the last decade. Individuals and corporations regularly avoid large, highly publicized penalties for wrongdoing - sometimes through negotiations, sometimes because companies go bankrupt, sometimes due to officials' failure to keep close track of who owes what under a decentralized collection system.

...

_The government is currently owed more than $35 billion in fines and other payments from criminals and in civil cases, according to Justice Department figures. This is almost five times the amount uncollected 10 years ago - and enough to cover the annual budget of the Department of Homeland Security. A decade ago, Congress mandated that fines be imposed regardless of defendants' ability to pay, which has added tremendously to outstanding debt.

_In 2004, federal authorities ordered $7.8 billion in 98,985 fines, penalties and restitution demands in criminal and civil cases, but collected less than half of that.

_White-collar crime cases account for the largest amount of uncollected debt. In a study, Government Accountability Office investigators found that just 7 percent of restitution in such cases is paid.

"Fines and orders to pay restitution are an important part of how we punish convicted criminals. When so little effort is made to collect that money, we allow convicted criminals to avoid punishment for their crimes, weaken our criminal justice system and ultimately deny justice to the victims of crimes," said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who has pressed for closer scrutiny for years.
...
Documents provided to the AP by the Labor Department's Employment Benefits Security Administration, whose job is to protect pension and welfare benefits, showed that $2,000 was the maximum amount paid on nearly a dozen penalties ranging from $86,500 to $180,000; these were for various kinds of violations, everything from failure to file reports to self-dealing by pension fund managers.

Why the reductions? Officials explained that compliance is the agency's goal, and that the law allows penalties to be reduced when companies make amends. Violators who don't comply risk being referred to the Treasury Department, which can collect by seizing federal benefits.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration's written policy explains to inspectors that they can reduce penalties by as much as 95 percent, "depending upon the employer's 'good faith,' (25 percent) 'size of business,' (60 percent) and 'history of previous violations.' (10 percent)"

Internal documents from U.S. Customs show that dramatically large fines may be cut sharply.

Agency documents released under AP's FOIA request listed, for example, a $60,911,316 "commercial fraud" assessment for one company - but the case ended with a $15,000 collection by Customs. ...

Judges Overturn Bush [administration] Bid to Ease Pollution Rules

Judges Overturn Bush Bid to Ease Pollution Rules - New York Times: "By MICHAEL JANOFSKY | Published: March 18, 2006

WASHINGTON, March 17 — A federal appeals court on Friday overturned a clean-air regulation issued by the Bush administration that would have let many power plants, refineries and factories avoid installing costly new pollution controls to help offset any increased emissions caused by repairs and replacements of equipment.

Ruling in favor of a coalition of states and environmental advocacy groups, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said the "plain language" of the law required a stricter approach. The court has primary jurisdiction in challenges to federal regulations. ...

NY Times ' Shane failed to report Sen. Roberts's role in Intel Committee stalemate ... investigation had been put "on the back-burner"

Media Matters - NY Times ' Shane failed to report Sen. Roberts's role in Intel Committee stalemate: "

Summary: A New York Times article on partisanship in the Senate Intelligence Committee investigations ignored the conduct of committee chair Pat Roberts in impeding investigations or blocking them outright.

A March 12 article by New York Times staff writer Scott Shane attributed to a 'partisan standoff' both the Senate Intelligence Committee's delay in completing the second phase of its investigation of prewar intelligence on Iraq and its failure to probe the CIA's handling of terrorism suspects. But in attributing the committee's failures to partisanship, Shane ignored the conduct of committee chairman Pat Roberts (R-KA) in apparently impeding both of these investigations or blocking them outright."
...
But Shane overlooked Roberts's apparent responsibility in both cases. Roberts has apparently delayed -- repeatedly -- the second phase of the committee's investigation into the administration's use of prewar intelligence, deeming it unnecessary. The committee's Phase I investigation, completed in April 2004, concerned the intelligence community's failure to provide accurate intelligence on the Iraqi threat. During the course of the initial investigation, Democrats on the committee reached an agreement with their Republican counterparts to conduct a second phase examining the administration's use of prewar intelligence.

Roberts initially called Phase II a "priority" and claimed that it would be completed sometime after the 2004 presidential election. But, in March 2005, he disclosed that it had been put "on the back-burner" and, on March 31, 2005, released a statement describing the investigation as "a monumental waste of time." In a June 22, 2005, letter, Senate Democrats urged the committee to "accelerate to completion the work of the so-called 'Phase II' effort to assess how policy makers used the intelligence they received." But in a July 20, 2005, response, Roberts disputed the fact that the committee had "agree[d] to examine the vague notion" of how policymakers used intelligence.

During the following months, Roberts failed to report any subsequent progress on Phase II, despite repeated inquiries from Democratic committee members. In response, Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (NV) forced the Senate into a rare closed-door session on November 1, 2005, and demanded a pledge from Roberts that the investigation would be completed.

Roberts immediately denied that he had stalled the investigation. "It isn't like it's been delayed," he said on the Senate floor that day. "As a matter of fact, it's been ongoing. As a matter of fact, we have been doing our work on Phase II." He again pledged to finish the investigation, despite continuing to dismiss the probe as unnecessary and irrelevant. On November 14, 2005, three Democratic members of the committee reported to Reid and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) that Roberts refused to exact "additional interviews and documents" needed to fully answer the "critical questions surrounding the use of intelligence in the months leading up to the war." ....

Bush's Fake Aid .... MCC appears to be using aid to reward countries that support the president's war on terror

Rolling Stone : Bush's Fake Aid: "The president's $5 billion program does more for foreign banks than the needy

In March 2002, with one war raging in Afghanistan and another looming in Iraq, President Bush announced that he intended to undercut terrorism by attacking poverty overseas. "I'm here today to announce a major new commitment by the United States to bring hope and opportunity to the world's poorest," Bush declared. Under his watch, the president said, America would increase its annual foreign aid to $5 billion. And instead of giving handouts, he added, the program would employ an entirely new model: investing in countries to spark their economic growth and holding them accountable for their policies. "I carry this commitment in my soul," Bush said, concluding his speech with a trademark religious touch. "We will make the world not only safer but better."
...

In a pattern that has become a hallmark of the administration, however, Bush's aid initiative -- the Millennium Challenge Corporation -- has become an object lesson in dramatic ideas followed by disastrous action. Over the past three months, Rolling Stone has reviewed the MCC's "compacts" with foreign countries, compared the work of similar agencies and spoken with a wide range of supporters and critics -- including many of the conservative insiders responsible for creating the program. Instead of hiring aid experts, the administration at first staffed the MCC with conservative ideologues. Rather than partnering with other countries, the White House operated on its own, disconnected from the rest of the world. And when experts criticized the new agency, the administration responded with a bunker mentality, refusing to talk to detractors and learn from its mistakes.

Today, four years after the president announced his initiative, the MCC has signed compacts with six countries -- offering only $1.2 billion in assistance. In February, Bush released a budget for 2007 that falls another $2 billion short of his pledge, bringing the total aid to less than half of what he promised. And the new budget once again pushes back the goal, stating that the administration "expects" to provide $5 billion annually in 2008.
...
Even leading conservatives who initially supported the program are now blasting the MCC. "The great promise of the Millennium Challenge was met with tremendous hope and anticipation," said Rep. Henry Hyde, who voted to authorize the initiative as chairman of the House International Relations Committee. But now, he said, "we see a program struggling to get off the ground . . . lacking the boldness necessary to break the cycle of poverty" -- a failure that "belies the original vision."
...
The six compacts signed by the MCC reflect this pro-business ideology. In Cape Verde, the agency plans to spend almost $86 million to mobilize investment and build the infrastructure needed to move goods to market -- nearly all of the $110 million in aid to the impoverished country. In Nicaragua, another $92 million in aid will be spent on infrastructure. In Georgia, the MCC will spend $32.5 million to establish a Wall Street-style investment for "enterprise development." Other projects under consideration have included an industrial park in Senegal and a tourist resort in Central America. "The early compacts don't reflect a broad swath of needs, like health and education," says David Gootnick, director of international affairs and trade at the GAO.

In some cases, the MCC appears to be using aid to reward countries that support the president's war on terror -- even though it is not supposed to base assistance on political favoritism. Georgia, which has served as a base for U.S. military operations, received $295.3 million from the MCC -- despite corruption and human-rights abuses that should make it ineligible for assistance under the MCC's own guidelines. "I see an awful lot of politics in this," says Fiona Hill, an expert on the former Soviet states at the Brookings Institution. "Georgia has taken steps back in terms of rights and freedoms." Testifying before Congress, even Applegarth acknowledged that the aid to Georgia involved what he discreetly referred to as an "element of judgment."...

Shocker: Senate Republicans Screw Veterans Again ... additional funding was to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes

BobGeiger.com: Shocker: Senate Republicans Screw Veterans Again: "Wednesday, March 15, 2006

In case you missed it in the Senate yesterday, Daniel Akaka (D-HI) proposed a bill to increase Veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2007 and Republicans shot it down with extreme prejudice.

The kiss of death for America’s Veterans was the fact that the additional funding was to be paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes, which ensured that the GOP-dominated Senate would take care of its corporate donors before worrying about those who truly serve our nation.

The 46-54 vote was entirely down party lines, with all Democrats voting for the Veterans medical care funding and every Republican but Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) voting against it.

"What is again missing -- in dollars and in deed -- is that this Administration still does not count caring for veterans as part of the cost of war,” said Akaka, before the vote was taken. “Defense spending for our service members while in combat has necessarily gone up. Accordingly, so must our commitment to caring for veterans once they return home."...

10-year-old boy prisoner of Guantanamo Bay -- found innocent after two years of detainment - Sinpleton Says: - Collective Bellaciao

BELLACIAO - 10-year-old boy prisoner of Guantanamo Bay -- found innocent after two years of detainment - Sinpleton Says: - Collective Bellaciao: "March Saturday 11th 2006 (18h39) :

February Sunday 19th 2006 (05h00) : 10-year-old boy prisoner of Guantanamo Bay -- found innocent after two years of detainment 23 comment(s). From: Eric Smith> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 02:10:46 0900 To: http://www.thenation.com/outrage/in... (hyperlinks also follow story.)

You’re kidding, right? That’s it?

After holding Brits in our extralegal dungeons for two years, one day we just let ’em go?

We’ve still got more than 600 people imprisoned in our Halliburton-built prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where for more than two years we’ve been interrogating them, denying them lawyers, denying them any kind of judicial review, hinting quite bluntly that they could all remain in limbo like this forever, and trying to put a brave face on all of the suicide attempts.

And every now and then, without comment, we bundle a few of them onto international flights and dump them out on a street somewhere -- and suddenly it turns out that this dangerous menace was just a bewildered Kabul taxi driver, or a 10-year-old."...

Republican lawmakers don't just turn a blind eye ... They actually legalize the president's misdeeds.

About That Rebellion ... - New York Times: "Published: March 11, 2006

We keep hearing that the Republicans in Congress are in revolt against the president.

Some rebellion.
...
Republican lawmakers don't just turn a blind eye when they learn that the president is making profoundly bad choices, like cutting constitutional corners, abrogating treaties and even breaking the law. They actually legalize the president's misdeeds.

Take domestic spying, held up as another area of Republican revolt. The program violates the law. Congress knows it. The public knows it. Even President Bush knows it. (He just says the law doesn't apply to him.) In response, the Capitol Hill rebels are boldly refusing to investigate the program — or any other warrantless spying that is going on. They are trying to rewrite the law to legalize warrantless spying. And meanwhile, they've created new subcommittees to help the president go on defying the law.

Over the last couple of years, Republican lawmakers have been given proof that American soldiers and intelligence agents abused, tortured and even killed prisoners, or sent them to other countries to be tortured. Without hesitation, the Republicans did nothing — no serious investigation, no accountability.

Congressional and White House negotiators then watered down the new anti-torture law, which Mr. Bush said did not really apply to him anyway. And they passed another law actually encouraging the abuse of prisoners by allowing the use of coerced evidence at hearings on the prisoners' status.

After 9/11, Mr. Bush created a network of prisons outside the American legal system so he could hold people indefinitely without any hearings. When the Supreme Court said twice that he was reaching beyond his powers, the Republicans in Congress were determined not to let this assault on the rule of law continue. So they rose as one, and legalized the president's actions. In case there was any confusion about its resolve, Congress told the courts that they could no longer rule on these matters. Mr. Bush got the message, loud and clear. He sent his lawyers right out to inform the judges, including the Supreme Court, that they had to drop all the cases that were already before them. ...

Senate Panel Blocks Eavesdropping Probe

Senate Panel Blocks Eavesdropping Probe: "By Walter Pincus | Washington Post Staff Writer | Wednesday, March 8, 2006; Page A03

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence voted along party lines yesterday to reject a Democratic proposal to investigate the Bush administration's domestic surveillance program and instead approved establishing, with White House approval, a seven-member panel to oversee the effort." ...
...
The panel's vice chairman, Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), took a sharply different view of yesterday's outcome. "The committee is, to put it bluntly, basically under the control of the White House through its chairman," he told reporters. "At the direction of the White House, the Republican majority has voted down my motion to have a careful and fact-based review of the National Security Agency's surveillance eavesdropping activities inside the United States." ...

Did 308,000 cancelled Ohio voter registrations put Bush back? Polls show Kerry by 4.2% -- then Bush wins -- virtual statistical impossibility

The Free Press -- Independent News Media - Election Issues: "Did 308,000 cancelled Ohio voter registrations put Bush back in the White House? | by Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman | February 28, 2006

While life goes on during the Bush2 nightmare, so does the research on what really happened here in 2004 to give George W. Bush a second term.
...
But things get curiouser and curiouser.

In our 2005 compendium HOW THE GOP STOLE OHIO'S 2004 ELECTION & IS RIGGING 2008 (www.freepress.org), we list more than a hundred different ways the Republican Party denied the democratic process in the Buckeye State. For a book of documents to be published September 11 by the New Press entitled WHAT HAPPENED IN OHIO?, we are continuing to dig.
...
One of them has just surfaced to the staggering tune of 175,000 purged voters in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), the traditional stronghold of the Ohio Democratic Party. An additional 10,000 that registered to vote there for the 2004 election were lost due to "clerical error."

As we reported more than a year ago, some 133,000 voters were purged from the registration rolls in Hamilton County (Cincinnati) and Lucas County (Toledo) between 2000 and 2004. The 105,000 from Cincinnati and 28,000 from Toledo exceeded Bush's official alleged margin of victory---just under 119,000 votes out of some 5.6 million the Republican Secretary of State. J. Kenneth Blackwell, deemed worth counting.

Exit polls flashed worldwide on CNN at 12:20 am Wednesday morning, November 3, showed John Kerry winning Ohio by 4.2% of the popular vote, probably about 250,000 votes. We believe this is an accurate reflection of what really happened here.

But by morning Bush was being handed the presidency, claiming a 2.5% Buckeye victory, as certified by Blackwell. In conjunction with other exit polling, the lead switch from Kerry to Bush is a virtual statistical impossibility. Yet John Kerry conceded with more than 250,000 ballots still uncounted, though Bush at the time was allegedly ahead only by 138,000, a margin that later slipped to less than 119,000 in the official vote count.

At the time, very few people knew about those first 133,000 voters that had been eliminated from the registration rolls in Cincinnati and Toledo. County election boards purged the voting registration lists. Though all Ohio election boards are allegedly bi-partisan, in fact they are all controlled by the Republican Party. Each has four seats, filled by law with two Democrats and two Republicans.

But all tie votes are decided by the Secretary of State, in this case Blackwell, the extreme right-wing Republican now running for Governor. Blackwell served in 2004 not only as the man in charge of the state's vote count, but also a co-chair of the Ohio Bush-Cheney campaign. ...

Only $25m of $2b Katrina relief aid has been spent

The Raw Story | Report: Only $25m of $2b Katrina relief aid has been spent: "RAW STORY | Published: March 8, 2006

Just $25 million of $2 billion in funding designated for states afflicted by Hurricane Katrina has been spent, a new report from the Center for Public Integrity will report late Wednesday afternoon, RAW STORY has learned.

The full report is now available here.

The shocking revelation that evacuees have been turned out while more than a billion dollars remains in relief aid comes as President Bush visits New Orleans today for the 10th time since Hurricane Katrina struck. Billions of dollars designated for hurricane relief have gone unused by state governments.

Jenni Bergal, the reports' author will write, “Just weeks after Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast, Congress scrambled to pass an emergency bill that gave states access to $2 billion to help low-income hurricane victims scattered across the country… But more than five months after the bill was signed into law, only 12 states - including Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama - have taken Congress up on its offer.”

In addition, the Center for Public Integrity will also note:

o As of Feb. 4th, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services records show that only $25.48 million of the $2 billion “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families” (TANF) funds had been awarded. ...

"Who could have known?" ... President Bush is great at sales, but he cannot deliver a product — time after time

The Seattle Times: Heck of a job, Mr. President: "Sunday, March 5, 2006 - Editorial

The Bush administration has a substantial credibility problem. Things it says turn out not to be true. Again and again.

Two troubling examples made the news last week, and they illustrate a serious problem rooted in a combination of political arrogance, incompetence and disdain for the audience. Often it seems the White House, or the president himself, offers the American public an incredulous shrug to punctuate the plea, "Who could have known?"

In Iraq, a virulent insurgency is killing civilians and American soldiers. Before the war, the Bush administration said the U.S. military would be greeted as liberators by a grateful public. Almost three years of mayhem and chaos later, the White House blames the insurgency on the residue of Saddam Hussein's supporters and foreign terrorists.

Who could have known?
...
This past week, as New Orleans celebrated a ragged but determined Mardi Gras, the same scenario of information and denial was exposed.

Transcripts and a government video revealed the administration and the president were warned in advance about the perils of Hurricane Katrina, the vulnerability of levees and the potential for catastrophe.
...
Before the storm hit, he was told firsthand about the dangers. So, it is mystifying how he could stand before the American public four days later and declare no one could have anticipated the levees being breached.
...
President Bush is great at sales, but he cannot deliver a product — time after time

The lie of the storm - The Boston Globe

The lie of the storm - The Boston Globe: "March 5, 2006

TELEVISION IMAGES can be misleading, but not in the case of the shadowy video that showed President Bush sitting quietly in Texas as he heard that Hurricane Katrina, bearing down on the Gulf Coast, was going to be ''the Big One.' Dressed in a suit coat even though he was on vacation, he looked like a president but did not act like one. Despite the warning on Sunday, Aug. 28, Bush let several crucial day slip by before he rallied the resources of the federal government to deal with this epochal disaster.
...
Instead, it was business as usual when the storm struck on Monday, Aug. 29, and for a day or two afterward. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff attended a conference on bird flu in Atlanta. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld toured military bases in California on Monday and the next day joined President Bush in San Diego for a ceremony commemorating the end of World War II.
...
Three days after Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast, Bush went on television to defend his handling of the crisis, saying: ''I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees." That may be technically true. The weather specialist who delivered part of the video briefing only expected some water to wash over the levees, but cautioned that worse was possible. Bush did make one misstatement during the video. ''I want to assure the folks at the state level that we are fully prepared," he said. But the Bush administration was not. History will judge him harshly for this failure.

Did 308,000 cancelled Ohio voter registrations put Bush back in the White House?

The Free Press -- Independent News Media - Election Issues: "Did 308,000 cancelled Ohio voter registrations put Bush back in the White House? | by Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman | February 28, 2006

While life goes on during the Bush2 nightmare, so does the research on what really happened here in 2004 to give George W. Bush a second term.

Pundits throughout the state and nation---many of them alleged Democrats---continue to tell those of us who question Bush's second coming that we should 'get over it,' that the election is old news.
...
One of them has just surfaced to the staggering tune of 175,000 purged voters in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), the traditional stronghold of the Ohio Democratic Party. An additional 10,000 that registered to vote there for the 2004 election were lost due to "clerical error."

As we reported more than a year ago, some 133,000 voters were purged from the registration rolls in Hamilton County (Cincinnati) and Lucas County (Toledo) between 2000 and 2004. The 105,000 from Cincinnati and 28,000 from Toledo exceeded Bush's official alleged margin of victory---just under 119,000 votes out of some 5.6 million the Republican Secretary of State. J. Kenneth Blackwell, deemed worth counting. ...
...
The Board of Elections in Toledo was chaired by Bernadette Noe, wife of Tom Noe, northwestern Ohio's "Mr. Republican." A close personal confidante of the Bush family, Noe raised more than $100,000 for the GOP presidential campaign in 2004. He is currently under indictment for three felony violations of federal election law, and 53 counts of fraud, theft and other felonies in the "disappearance" of more than $13 million in state funds. Noe was entrusted with investing those funds by Republican Gov. Robert Taft, who recently pled guilty to four misdemeanor charges, making him the only convicted criminal ever to serve as governor of Ohio.

The rationale given by Noe and by the Republican-controlled BOE in Lucas and Hamilton Counties was that the voters should be eliminated from the rolls because they had allegedly not voted in the previous two federal elections.

There is no law that requires such voters be eliminated. And there is no public verification that has been offered to confirm that these people had not, in fact, voted in those elections.

Nonetheless, tens of thousands of voters turned up in mostly Democratic wards in Cincinnati and Toledo, only to find they had been mysteriously removed from the voter rolls. In many cases, sworn testimony and affidavits given at hearings after the election confirmed that many of these citizens had in fact voted in the previous two federal elections and had not moved from where they were registered. In some cases, their stability at those addresses stretched back for decades. ...

U.S. Is Reducing Safety Penalties for Mine Flaws - failed to hand over any delinquent cases to the Treasury Department

U.S. Is Reducing Safety Penalties for Mine Flaws - New York Times: "By IAN URBINA and ANDREW W. LEHREN | Published: March 2, 2006

CRAIGSVILLE, W.Va. — In its drive to foster a more cooperative relationship with mining companies, the Bush administration has decreased major fines for safety violations since 2001, and in nearly half the cases, it has not collected the fines, according to a data analysis by The New York Times.

Federal records also show that in the last two years the federal mine safety agency has failed to hand over any delinquent cases to the Treasury Department for further collection efforts, as is supposed to occur after 180 days.

Tape: Bush, Chertoff Warned Before Katrina - assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: ''We are fully prepared.''

Tape: Bush, Chertoff Warned Before Katrina - New York Times: "Tape: Bush, Chertoff Warned Before Katrina" | By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS | Published: March 1, 2006 | Filed at 11:04 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In dramatic and sometimes agonizing terms, federal disaster officials warned President Bush and his homeland security chief before Hurricane Katrina struck that the storm could breach levees, put lives at risk in New Orleans' Superdome and overwhelm rescuers, according to confidential video footage.

Bush didn't ask a single question during the final briefing before Katrina struck on Aug. 29, but he assured soon-to-be-battered state officials: ''We are fully prepared.''

The footage -- along with seven days of transcripts of briefings obtained by The Associated Press -- show in excruciating detail that while federal officials anticipated the tragedy that unfolded in New Orleans and elsewhere along the Gulf Coast, they were fatally slow to realize they had not mustered enough resources to deal with the unprecedented disaster.

Linked by secure video, Bush expressed a confidence on Aug. 28 that starkly contrasted with the dire warnings his disaster chief and numerous federal, state and local officials provided during the four days before the storm. ...
...
-- Bush declared four days after the storm, ''I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees'' that gushed deadly flood waters into New Orleans. He later clarified, saying officials believed, wrongly, after the storm passed that the levees had survived. But the transcripts and video show there was plenty of talk about that possibility even before the storm -- and Bush was worried too.

White House deputy chief of staff Joe Hagin, Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco and Brown discussed fears of a levee breach the day the storm hit.