Comments (6)

Anonymous wrote on July 31, 2007 5:03 PM:

Foley Ethics investigation -- that one about the Pages -- had some interesting lessons. Too bad the US Atty-firing ethics "review" didn't have some better leadership than what we saw in re Foley.
- After action report on the Foley Ethics investigation?
- Lessons learned?

If Congress can't get it right, suppose they'll have "more time" to eventually? The Article I rule making in section 5 is "may" make rules; doesn't mean that they have _exclusive_ rule making powers. [ "Each House _may_ determine the Rules of its Proceedings" ] We the People and the States can define "other rules" which they _shall_ meet. Grand Juries can decide -- on their own -- what these reasonable rules are, and whether Members of Congress haven't fully done their job.

It _doesn't_ say that the House or Senate "shall have exclusive power to make rules", only that they _may_ make rules; rather the 10th Amendment reserves to the states and We the People the power to delegate to ourselves, the _exclusive_ power to do _other things_ which the Congress refuses to do: Govern, oversee, ensure rules are reasonable, and that the Congress -- as an entity -- is responsive to its legal mandate to ensure there is an _enforcement_ mechanism of those rules and the Constitution.

Congress has quite a staff: 535 Members, and the budget to hire people; and authority to contract for experts. If the House and Senate want to remain "self" regulating, they need to regulate, reform, and show they are doing things which they say the President is not doing in Iraq and Katrina. GAO has alot of efficiency and management types who can assist.

The idea of voting isn't that it's a one off look, but there can be structures created that oversee Congress on a day to day basis: Outside the media; with subpoena power; and fully empowered to compel Members of Congress to appear. They are called Grand Juries on issues of malfeasance; and there are other bodies We the People, in concert with our retained powers of the 10th Amendment, may assert. Any. Time. We. Choose.

Wake up Congress. Your "mandate" doesn't mean keep sleeping. It means We the People can use all lawful powers we retain to lawfully make your daily lives one that responds, awakens, and does its job, not makes excuses. What happens when the "People's House" isn't responsive to the People?

Anonymous wrote on July 31, 2007 5:26 PM:

Some may think that We the People can't make rules: Non-sense, we can _require_ Members of Congress -- through an audit -- to _show_ that they are meeting _minimal_ levels of compliance. We may also promulgate other rules which Congress _shall_ meet. Some examples of what these rules "might" look like include:

Google [ Mason's rules ]
Google [ Robert's Rules of Order ]

We the People can, through the 10th Amendment, compel the Congress as a body, and Members of Congress, as defendants to _show_ that it/they are fully meeting these rules which We the People, through our _retained_ rule making powers, can impose on Members of Congress.

Grand Juries have the power -- through indictments -- to enforce these rules. Any. Way. The. Grand. Jury. Chooses. "Malfeasance" can be broadly construed to be a Member of Congress not providing leadership, not being responsive, and not fully ensuring that the Congress fully ensures the Congress -- itself -- is functioning and disciplined.

Congress refuses to awaken to their oath; We the People can awaken Member of Congress to "our rules" which we enforce through Grand Jury indictments: All 535 of you. Eternally. Under. The. Spotlight. Of. Possible. Prosecution. For. Malfeasance. Using. Any. Rules. We. Choose.

These Grand Juries can target Members of Congress, Staff counsel, interns, and others who are aware, have an ability to influence, policy, or have failed to meet the minimal levels of standards and competence expected them under 5 USC 3331. The Grand Jury -- not Congress -- decides what "the law" is in relationship to 5 USC 3331 and Member of Congress, Staff counsel, and supporting contractor functioning.

We the People through the States may eternally use 5 USC 3331 as "our rule" which gives us the means to promulgate through the Grand Jury precedent: Any. Rule. We. The. People. Choose. To. Impose. Members of Congress are powerless to stop We the People from doing this.

Items to review:
- Whether Members of Congress, upon notification of issues related to FISA violations, ethics problems, or misconduct by their peers were or were not reckless in forwarding that information -- as We the People, through 5 USC 3331 should reasonably expect -- for proper, timely, action.
- Whether the internal controls Congress creates, ignores, or violates are or are not consistent with reasonable auditing practises and standards expected of all Members of Congress to oversee
- Whether the auditing rules, standards, and other policies related to internal controls have been effectively implemented
- Whether the President, Congress, and Judiciary have or have not been effectively sub jet to adequate GAO audits; and reasonable Congressional language and contracting to fully modernized the systems of governance within Congress to implement the required oversight to mange these legislative functions under Acts of Congress

These are not exclusive decisions that are only subject to voting decisions, but are ongoing audit requirements that We the People can compel Congress's to demonstrate. Any. Time. We. Choose. Without a response, the Grand Juries may made adverse inferences: Members of Congress have not met the requisite standards expected through 5 USC 3331 to fully defend the Constitution. Prosecutions remain on the table. Grand juries may work with any expert witness to review whether the standards of legal counsel, auditors, and other management disciplines were or were not reasonably applied to the Congressional system of governance, as We the People can reasonably expect and enforce, through the 10th Amendment, through direct prosecutions of Members of Congress.

SUMMATION

To some in the legal community who appear to have "lost hope" that Congress will or will not respond, perhaps you should step aside, and let those marginally more interested in fully asserting the 10th Amendment to fully assert the oversight powers of We the People. We don't need pathetic excuses to give up; we need people who are going to find ways to fully assert the power of We the People. If you do not have the optimism there is a solution, step out of the way, read the 10th Amendment, and lets implement a solution so the Grand Juries are well primed to lawfully assert the retained powers of We the People to awaken Congress to their requirements. That is reason for hope: There is a way; any claim that "nothing can be done: ignores the 10th Amendment which delegates to We the People and the States -- through retained powers and rights -- all things which have not been delegated to the US government. Without an express delegation, that power remains with the States and We the People.

That is every reason to have hope and be optimistic: There is fertile ground waiting for We the People to examine in search of the smallest annoyances which might awaken the lazy Congress to its legal obligations, to which they swore an oath to God. We the People have the lawful powers to compel the Congress to respond. Legislative immunity is not absolute: It is qualified, especially when a reasonable Grand Jury member can figure out what the definition of leadership, competence, and governance means: Not within the walls of this Congress. Yet. It can be done.

TheraP wrote on July 31, 2007 5:45 PM:

Thank you, anonymous!

I've just put up another blog post related to your comments, advice, and reassurance.

Readers: Please click on my name to assist the poster above, who so kindly continues to provide further information.

**** Project for Constitutional Compliance ****

Read about it. Find your own way to assist. Thanks!

GWPRIESTER wrote on July 31, 2007 6:33 PM:

I live in New Mexico. Dominici is a wily old politician and I think he and Ms. Wilson are feeling the heat from this scandal as well they should.

I suspect that this was the reason Mr. Dominici called for a new direction in Iraq was to try to salvage some of his credibility with the voters.

Dominici is up for reelection in 2008. And while he has a very strong constituency in this state, a lot of his base are not very happy with his part in firing David Iglesias. Mr. Dominici and Ms. Wilson have discovered best way to turn a good Republican like Mr. Iglesias into plus for the Liberals in the state.

Eagles wrote on December 12, 2007 5:59 PM:

sale@mp3.com

Eagles wrote on December 12, 2007 8:39 PM:

sale@mp3.com