Watch Anime Online

New Episodes: naruto one piece bleach trigun kenichi inuyasha devil may cry deathnote claymore

User: firedoglake

Clinton Supporter Thrown Out of Rules Committee Meeting http://firedoglake.com Clinton supporter Harriet Christian angry after Rules & Bylaws committee meeting on Florida and Michigan. http://firedoglake.com/2008/05/31/clinton-supporter-ejected-from-meeting-mccain-will-be-our-next-president/ Tags: Harriet Christian Hillary Clinton Rules Committee Meeting

User: Richardson4President

Gov Richardson Announces Presidential Exploratory Committee New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson today announced the formation of a Presidential campaign exploratory committee, with the clear intention of seeking the Democratic nomination for President in 2008. "I am taking this step because we have to repair the damage that's been done to our country over the last six years," said Richardson. "Our reputation in the world is diminished, our economy has languished, and civility and common decency in government has perished." "The next president of the United States must get our troops out of Iraq without delay. Before I became Governor of New Mexico, I served as Ambassador to the United Nations and as Secretary of Energy. I know the Middle East well and it's clear that our presence in Iraq isn't helping any longer," said Richardson. "Our next President must be able to bring a country together that is divided and partisan," said Richardson. "It is clear that Washington is broken and it's going to take a return to bipartisanship and simple respect for each other's views to get it fixed. Most public policy solutions these days are coming from Governors and state government. On issues like the environment, jobs, and health care, state governments are leading the way. And that's because we can't be partisan or we won't get our jobs done. That's a lesson I've learned as Governor and that's what I'll do as President." Tags: Governor Bill Richardson 2008 New Mexico politics Southwest Western Democrat

User: POWERUPFILMS

Itty Bitty Titty Committee -Theatrical Release Trailer Jamie Babbit's "Itty Bitty Titty Committee" -Theatrical Release Trailer Starring: Melonie Diaz, Nicole Vicius, Carly Pope, Melanie Mayron, Daniela Sea, Guinevere Turner, Jenny Shimizu, Leslie Grossman, Deak Evgenikos, Lauren Mollica http://www.wolfevideo.com/products.asp?R=25&id=1443 Tags: Melonie Diaz Nicole Vicius Carly Pope Melanie Mayron Daniela Sea Guinevere Turner Jenny Shimizu Leslie Grossman

User: Google

David Drummond testifies before Senate Judiciary Committee David Drummond, Google's Senior Vice President of Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights at a September 27, 2007 hearing about online advertising and Google's acquisition of DoubleClick. Topics of discussion include how Google's advertising network benefits consumers, the competitive nature of the online advertising business, and the high importance Google places on protecting users' privacy. Tags: Google DoubleClick

User: 911truthnc

Dr John Coleman/Committee of 300 - 1of10 http://coleman300.com/ Dr. John Coleman is a former intelligence agent of British MI6. He rips the lid off the conspiratorial group which knows NO national boundaries, is ABOVE the law of ALL countries and controls every aspect of politics, commerce, religion, industry, banking, insurance, mining, and even the drug trade. Learn how this small elite group who are answerable to NO ONE, except its members, have pulled the strings on ALL major world events and why, until now, few people have even been aware of its existence, let alone power, in manipulating the affairs of the entire WORLD. All of these members are revealed, including all of the corporations, government agencies and various movements which "they" have developed and control to further their own aims for WORLD DOMINATION. are you informed http://truth-tv.org http://beautifulevil.net Tags: You CAN Handle The Truth Dr John Coleman Committee of 300 NWO web series

User: radicalfilms

Committee On Un-American Activities History of the HUAC from its inception in 1938, through the Hollywood investigations of 1948, to the 1960 San Francisco City hall police water hosing of protestors. The first film by a private citizen which dares to challenge a Government agency. Tags: Communism HUAC Un-American Witch-Hunt Subversion Expose

User: cspander

Senate Judiciary Committee w/Alberto Gonzales-7/24/07 Pt15 Part 15 of 32 Senate Judiciary Committee with Alberto Gonzales. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse questions Alberto Gonzales. 7/24/07 KEEP IN MIND: Gonzales was given each and every question he would be asked beforehand. Nothing was a surprise - there was absolutely NO "GOTCHA!" Transcript of this portion of the hearing: WHITEHOUSE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Gonzales, just before our little break, you indicated, in describing your reason for visiting the stricken attorney general in his hospital room was to alert him to the change in the Department of Justice view of the program at issue. And you testified that Attorney General Ashcroft -- and these are the words that I wrote down -- quote, "Authorized these activities for over two years." Is it your testimony, under oath, that Attorney General Ashcroft was read into and authorized the program at issue for two years prior to your visit to him in that hospital? GONZALES: I want to be very careful here, because it's fairly complicated. What I can say is I'm referring to intelligence activities that existed for a period of over two years and what we were asking the Department of Justice to do was -- which they had approved and what we... WHITEHOUSE: "They had approved" I guess is the point that I'm getting at. GONZALES: General Ashcroft, yes. WHITEHOUSE: You're saying that Attorney General Ashcroft... GONZALES: Yes. WHITEHOUSE: ... had authorized this program for over two years prior to that day... GONZALES: General Ashcroft had authorized these very important intelligence activities for a period of two years. We had gone -- we had gone to the deputy attorney general and asked him to reauthorize these same activities. But there are facts here, and I want to be fair to everyone involved. They're complicated. And we have had discussions in the Intel Committees about this issue. I'll try to be as forthcoming as we can. Let me just say I believe everyone acted in good faith here. All the lawyers worked as hard as they could to try to find a way forward, the right solution. But, yes. I mean, the view was is that these activities had been authorized. GONZALES: We informed... WHITEHOUSE: By Attorney General Ashcroft? GONZALES: By Attorney General Ashcroft. But there are additional facts here that -- I want to be fair. And it's complicated, but... WHITEHOUSE: I'm just trying to nail that one fact down. I'm not trying to... GONZALES: Well, I'm not sure that I... (CROSSTALK) GONZALES: I'm not sure I can give you complete comfort -- I'm not sure I want to give you complete comfort on that point, out of fairness to others involved in what happened here. I want to be very fair to them. But what I'm -- what we are talking about... WHITEHOUSE: (inaudible) different question. LEAHY: Why not just be fair to the truth? Just be fair to the truth and answer the question. (APPLAUSE) WHITEHOUSE: Was Attorney General Ashcroft read into, and did he approve the program at issue from its inception? GONZALES: General Ashcroft was read into these activities, and did approve these activities... WHITEHOUSE: Beginning when? GONZALES: From the very beginning. I believe, from the very beginning. WHITEHOUSE: All right. GONZALES: But, well... WHITEHOUSE: I'm sorry? My question... (CROSSTALK) GONZALES: Again, it's very complicated. And I want to be fair to General Ashcroft and others involved in this. And it's hard to describe this in this open setting. We've tried to be -- we've tried to discuss -- we have discussed in the Intel Committees, in terms of exactly what happened here. But I can't get into the fine details, quite frankly, because I want to be fair to General Ashcroft. WHITEHOUSE: And I think it's also important that people know whether or not a program was run with or without the approval of the Department of Justice but without the knowledge and approval of the attorney general of the United States, if that was ever the case. GONZALES: We believe we had the approval of the attorney general of the United States for a period of two years. WHITEHOUSE: For a period of two years? GONZALES: That is what... (CROSSTALK) WHITEHOUSE: Also from the inception of the program? GONZALES: From the very -- from the inception, we believed that we had the approval of the attorney general of the United States for these activities, these particular activities. WHITEHOUSE: Would that be reflected in any document? GONZALES: Yes, it would. WHITEHOUSE: We'll pursue the document later. When you went into the attorney general's room at the hospital that night, what document did you have in your hand? GONZALES: I had in my possession a document to reauthorize the program. WHITEHOUSE: Where is it now? GONZALES: I'm assuming the document is at the White House. It was a White House document. WHITEHOUSE: And it would be covered by presidential records laws? GONZALES: It is a White House document. WHITEHOUSE: Director Mueller was involved that evening. Do you consider Director Mueller to be reasonable, sober and level-headed? GONZALES: Yes. WHITEHOUSE: He's a former deputy attorney general, former United States attorney? GONZALES: Yes. WHITEHOUSE: Why would he tell FBI agents not to allow you and Andy Card to throw the acting attorney general out of the attorney general's hospital room? GONZALES: I don't know that he did that, and I can't respond to your question. I'm not Director Mueller. WHITEHOUSE: But we have direct testimony that he did. You can't -- is there any series of events that led up to this that would so provoke him... GONZALES: I wasn't aware of that comment until I read Mr. Comey's testimony. WHITEHOUSE: Is there some background to this that would help elaborate why he would have that feeling? I mean, when the FBI director considers you so nefarious that FBI agents had to be ordered not to leave you alone with the stricken attorney general, that's a fairly serious challenge. GONZALES: Well, again, I'm not sure that the director knew at the time of the meeting and a conversation that we had had with the congressional leaders. We were -- again, we were there following an emergency meeting in the White House Situation Room with the gang of eight, who said, "Despite the recommendation of the attorney general, go forward with very important intelligence activities for now and we'll see about moving forward some legislation." And that was important information that led us to go to the hospital room. The director, I'm quite confident, did not have that information when he made those statements, if he made those statements. WHITEHOUSE: Is it awkward to supervise the FBI after this piece of history has come out, that the director didn't feel comfortable leaving you alone with the attorney general? GONZALES: I can't speak for the director's feelings about me. But I still have a great deal of confidence and admiration and respect for Bob Mueller. WHITEHOUSE: Separate topic: Will you allow the White House to direct United States attorneys how to conduct litigation to which the White House is itself a party? GONZALES: Would I... WHITEHOUSE: Would you allow the White House to direct United States attorneys how to conduct litigation to which the White House is a party? GONZALES: I don't believe so. Again, you're asking me a hypothetical. But my reaction to that is no. WHITEHOUSE: Is there any matter -- any matter that the Department of Justice is involved in in which you would allow the Department of Justice to agree to the investigative terms set by the White House for this committee: no transcript, closed-door interviews, one round of questions only and then nevermore? WHITEHOUSE: Is there any matter in the department's jurisdiction where you would allow your lawyers to subject themselves to that kind of a restriction in doing their duties? GONZALES: You know I can't answer that question. I mean, I don't know. There may be a matter, but I don't know. I don't know. WHITEHOUSE: Can you think of one... GONZALES: Again, I mean, I could probably think of one, so... WHITEHOUSE: ... where you would allow your lawyers to be subject to those restrictions? GONZALES: Senator, again, you're asking me is it possible? I'd say virtually anything is possible. But, obviously, that's something we'd have to look at. WHITEHOUSE: My time has expired, Mr. Chairman. Tags: senate judiciary committee cspan cheney sheldon whitehouse part 15 alberto gonzales 7/24/07 cssjcagpt1572407

User: GraysonTheOwl

Emergency Committee The British countryside begs the people of Britain to change their travel habits and take the train Tags: global warming environment green plane travel car virgin trains British countryside carbon emissions Emergency Committee

User: redredk

Zbigniew Brzezinski @ The Senate Foreign Relations Committee PBS News Hour February 1, 2007. Former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski warned terrorist attack may occur IN THE UNITED STATES, by someone. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june07/iraq_02-01.html Tags: brzezinski 911truth 9/11 911 truth terror war iraq

User: cspander

Senate Judiciary Committee with Alberto Gonzales-7/24/07 Pt3 Part 3 of 32 Senate Judiciary Committee with Alberto Gonzales. Ranking member Senator Arlen Specter's opening statement. 7/24/07 KEEP IN MIND: Gonzales was given each and every question he would be asked beforehand. Nothing was a surprise - there was absolutely NO "GOTCHA!" Transcript of this portion of the hearing: SPECTER: Let me move quickly through a series of questions -- there's a lot to cover -- starting with the issue that Mr. Comey raises. You said, quote, "There has not been any serious disagreement about the program." Mr. Comey's testimony was that Mr. Gonzales began to discuss why they were there, to seek approval, and he then says, quote, "I was very upset. I was angry. I thought I had just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man." SPECTER: First of all, Mr. Attorney General, what credibility is left for you when you say there's no disagreement and you're party to going to the hospital to see Attorney General Ashcroft under sedation to try to get him to approve the program? GONZALES: The disagreement that occurred, and the reason for the visit to the hospital, Senator, was about other intelligence activities. It was not about the terrorist surveillance program that the president announced to the American people. Now, I would like the opportunity... SPECTER: Mr. Attorney General, do you expect us to believe that? GONZALES: Well, may I have the opportunity to talk about another very important meeting in connection with the hospital visit that puts it into context? It was an emergency meeting in the White House Situation Room that afternoon. It involved senior members of the administration and the bipartisan leadership of the Congress, both House and Senate, as well as the bipartisan leadership of the House and Senate Intel Committees, the gang of eight. The purpose of that meeting was for the White House to advise the Congress that Mr. Comey had advised us that he could not approve the continuation of vitally important intelligence activities despite the repeated approvals during the past two years of the same activities. SPECTER: OK. Assuming you're leveling with us on this occasion... (CROSSTALK) SPECTER: No, I want to move to the point about how can you get approval from Ashcroft for anything when he's under sedation and incapacitated -- for anything. GONZALES: May I continue the story, Senator? SPECTER: No, I want you to answer my question. GONZALES: Senator, obviously there was concern about General Ashcroft's condition. GONZALES: And we would not have sought nor did we intend to get any approval from General Ashcroft if in fact he wasn't fully competent to make that decision. But General -- there are no rules governing whether or not General Ashcroft can decide, "I'm feeling well enough to make this decision." SPECTER: But, Attorney General Gonzales, he had already given up his authority as attorney general. (CROSSTALK) SPECTER: ... was no longer attorney general. GONZALES: And he could always reclaim that. There are no rules... SPECTER: While he's in the hospital under sedation? (LAUGHTER) GONZALES: Again, we didn't know -- we knew, of course, that he was ill, that he'd had surgery... SPECTER: Not making any progress here. Let me go to another topic. (LAUGHTER) Attorney General, I wouldn't -- and I'd like to have a lot of time, but I've got three minutes and 43 seconds left, and seven topics to cover with you. Mr. Attorney General, do you think constitutional government in the United States can survive if the president has the unilateral authority to reject congressional inquiries on grounds of executive privilege and the president then acts to bar the Congress from getting a judicial determination as to whether that executive privilege is properly invoked? GONZALES: Senator, you're asking me a question that is related to an ongoing controversy which I am recused -- I will say the president's tried very hard... SPECTER: Oh, no, no. I'm not asking you a question about something you're recused. I'm asking you a question about constitutional law. GONZALES: You're asking me a question that's related to an ongoing controversy. SPECTER: I'm asking you whether you can have a constitutional government with the Congress exercising its constitutional authority for oversight if when the president claims executive privilege, the president then forecloses the Congress from getting a judicial determination of it. That's a constitutional law question. GONZALES: Senator, both the Congress and the president have constitutional authorities. Sometimes they clash. In most cases, accommodations are reached. In very rare instances, they sometimes litigate it in the courts. SPECTER: Would you focus on my question for just a minute, please? GONZALES: Senator, I'm not going to answer this question, because it does relate to an ongoing controversy in which I am recused. (BOOING) LEAHY: I would note, please, we'll have decorum in here. Senator Specter has a right to ask all the questions he has. The attorney general has a right to be heard. I have indicated to Senator Specter especially that I'm taking some of his time in saying this, so he has extra time. But, please, let us continue without comments. SPECTER: I'm not going to pursue that question, Mr. Attorney General, because I see it's hopeless. It's got nothing to do with your recusal. You're the attorney general, and you're also a lawyer. And we're dealing with a very fundamental controversy, where the president is exerting executive authority under executive privilege and the Congress is exerting constitutional authority for oversight. And we're trying to take it to court. The court decides when that conflict exists. It's got nothing to do with, necessarily, the U.S. attorneys who were asked to resign. Let me move ahead to another subject, see if I get an answer here. You have a conflict of interest on the matter involving the resignations of the U.S. attorneys. GONZALES: Yes. I'm recused for that. SPECTER: Does the president have a conflict of interest in deciding whether or not to allow a contempt citation to go forward to a former White House counsel, Harriet Miers? GONZALES: Senator, I am not going to answer that question. Again, you're talking about -- asking me questions about a matter in which I am recused. I'm not going to answer that question. SPECTER: Well, let's see if somehow, somewhere, we can find a question you'll answer. (LAUGHTER) How about the death penalty case? I wrote you about this. Had a man who was convicted of murder. The victim's body was never recovered. There was no forensic evidence directly linking the defendant to the victim's death. The U.S. attorney, a man named Paul Charlton, contacted your office and said, "I don't think this is a proper case for the death penalty." SPECTER: Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty had a conversation with Mr. Charlton and had a conversation with you. And then McNulty's chief of staff, Mike Ellston, called Charlton. And this is Charlton's testimony: "Ellston indicated that McNulty had spoken to the attorney general and that McNulty wanted me to be aware of two things; first, that McNulty had spent a significant amount of time on this issue with the attorney general, perhaps as much as five or 10 minutes." Is that accurate, factually? Will you answer a question as to a fact, as to whether you talked to McNulty about this case for as much as five or 10 minutes? GONZALES: I have no specific recollection as to this particular case. But I can tell you, we have a very detailed process, where hours are spent by lawyers, including the U.S. attorney, our capital case review unit, who then make recommendations to the deputy attorney general... SPECTER: I'm not interested in that. I'm interested in an answer to my question. If you don't know, if you don't remember... GONZALES: I don't -- I don't... SPECTER: Wait a minute. I'm not finished asking you a question. If you don't know or you don't remember what happened when you stood on a decision to have a man executed -- that's what you're saying. GONZALES: I have no specific recollection about the amount of time that I talked with Paul McNulty on this particular issue. SPECTER: Well, would you disagree with McNulty that it was five to 10 minutes? GONZALES: I can't agree with that if I don't recall, Senator. SPECTER: OK, you can't agree with it. I didn't ask you that. I asked you if you disagreed with it. GONZALES: I can't agree or disagree with it. SPECTER: Would you say that five to 10 minutes would be a, quote, "significant amount of time" for you to spend on a case involving the death penalty? GONZALES: It would depend on the circumstances of the case and the recommendations coming up and the facts. Those would all dictate how much time I would spend, personally, on a particular case. Because we have a very extensive review process within the department, where hours are spent analyzing what is the appropriate course of action for the department... SPECTER: Well, Mr. Attorney General, I'm not totally unfamiliar with this sort of thing. When I was district attorney of Philadelphia, I had 500 homicides a year. I didn't allow any assistant to ask for the death penalty that I hadn't personally approved. And when I asked for the death penalty, I remembered the case. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Tags: senate judiciary committee transcript arlen specter cspan part 3 alberto gonzales 7/24/07 cssjcagpt372407

User: HouseJudiciary

Jamie Leigh Jones Testifies Before House Judiciary Committee House Judiciary Committee hearings on the Jamie Leigh Jones gang rape by Halliburton/KBR employees Tags: "jamie leigh jones" "john conyers" "Halliburton" "KBR Rape Case"

User: Bluemoon01

Itty Bitty Titty Committee Trailer High School grad and all American gal, Hannah finds her purpose and herself after she hooks up with the radical feminists in The Itty Bitty Titty Committee. With an amazing cast: Melonie Diaz Nicole Vicius Carly Pope Daniela Sea Melanie Mayron Deak Evgenikos Lauren Mollica Jenny Shimizu Guinevere Turner Leslie Grossman Jimmi Simpson Theatrical Release Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5k1DTGdWpE IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0496328/ Powerup: http://www.power-up.net/ibtc.htm Myspace: http://www.myspace.com/ittybittymovie Tags: Itty Bitty Titty Committee Trailer Diaz Vicius Pope Sea Mayron Evgenikos Mollica Shimizu Turner Grossman Simpson Lesbian

User: BobBarr2008

Bob Barr Exploratory Committee Announcement Former Congressman Bob Barr officially announces the Barr 2008 Presidential Exploratory Committee. Go to BobBarr2008.com and send Bob a message that you want him to run! Tags: Announcement

User: dmydlack

judicial committee "Voices from the New American Schoolhouse," a film by Danny Mydlack Tags: Sudbury freeschool unschool Fairhaven

User: freegazaps

Popular Committee Against Siege Popular Committee Against Siege Tags: Gaza Palestine Siege غزة الحصار

User: cspander

Senate Judiciary Committee with Alberto Gonzales-7/24/07 Pt6 Part 6 of 32 Senate Judiciary Committee with Alberto Gonzales. First half of Senator Arlen Specter questions to Gonzales. 7/24/07 KEEP IN MIND: Gonzales was given each and every question he would be asked beforehand. Nothing was a surprise - there was absolutely NO "GOTCHA!" Transcript of this portion of the hearing: SPECTER: Let me move quickly through a series of questions -- there's a lot to cover -- starting with the issue that Mr. Comey raises. You said, quote, "There has not been any serious disagreement about the program." Mr. Comey's testimony was that Mr. Gonzales began to discuss why they were there, to seek approval, and he then says, quote, "I was very upset. I was angry. I thought I had just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man." SPECTER: First of all, Mr. Attorney General, what credibility is left for you when you say there's no disagreement and you're party to going to the hospital to see Attorney General Ashcroft under sedation to try to get him to approve the program? GONZALES: The disagreement that occurred, and the reason for the visit to the hospital, Senator, was about other intelligence activities. It was not about the terrorist surveillance program that the president announced to the American people. Now, I would like the opportunity... SPECTER: Mr. Attorney General, do you expect us to believe that? GONZALES: Well, may I have the opportunity to talk about another very important meeting in connection with the hospital visit that puts it into context? It was an emergency meeting in the White House Situation Room that afternoon. It involved senior members of the administration and the bipartisan leadership of the Congress, both House and Senate, as well as the bipartisan leadership of the House and Senate Intel Committees, the gang of eight. The purpose of that meeting was for the White House to advise the Congress that Mr. Comey had advised us that he could not approve the continuation of vitally important intelligence activities despite the repeated approvals during the past two years of the same activities. SPECTER: OK. Assuming you're leveling with us on this occasion... (CROSSTALK) SPECTER: No, I want to move to the point about how can you get approval from Ashcroft for anything when he's under sedation and incapacitated -- for anything. GONZALES: May I continue the story, Senator? SPECTER: No, I want you to answer my question. GONZALES: Senator, obviously there was concern about General Ashcroft's condition. GONZALES: And we would not have sought nor did we intend to get any approval from General Ashcroft if in fact he wasn't fully competent to make that decision. But General -- there are no rules governing whether or not General Ashcroft can decide, "I'm feeling well enough to make this decision." SPECTER: But, Attorney General Gonzales, he had already given up his authority as attorney general. (CROSSTALK) SPECTER: ... was no longer attorney general. GONZALES: And he could always reclaim that. There are no rules... SPECTER: While he's in the hospital under sedation? (LAUGHTER) GONZALES: Again, we didn't know -- we knew, of course, that he was ill, that he'd had surgery... SPECTER: Not making any progress here. Let me go to another topic. (LAUGHTER) Attorney General, I wouldn't -- and I'd like to have a lot of time, but I've got three minutes and 43 seconds left, and seven topics to cover with you. Mr. Attorney General, do you think constitutional government in the United States can survive if the president has the unilateral authority to reject congressional inquiries on grounds of executive privilege and the president then acts to bar the Congress from getting a judicial determination as to whether that executive privilege is properly invoked? GONZALES: Senator, you're asking me a question that is related to an ongoing controversy which I am recused -- I will say the president's tried very hard... SPECTER: Oh, no, no. I'm not asking you a question about something you're recused. I'm asking you a question about constitutional law. GONZALES: You're asking me a question that's related to an ongoing controversy. SPECTER: I'm asking you whether you can have a constitutional government with the Congress exercising its constitutional authority for oversight if when the president claims executive privilege, the president then forecloses the Congress from getting a judicial determination of it. That's a constitutional law question. GONZALES: Senator, both the Congress and the president have constitutional authorities. Sometimes they clash. In most cases, accommodations are reached. In very rare instances, they sometimes litigate it in the courts. SPECTER: Would you focus on my question for just a minute, please? GONZALES: Senator, I'm not going to answer this question, because it does relate to an ongoing controversy in which I am recused. (BOOING) LEAHY: I would note, please, we'll have decorum in here. Senator Specter has a right to ask all the questions he has. The attorney general has a right to be heard. I have indicated to Senator Specter especially that I'm taking some of his time in saying this, so he has extra time. But, please, let us continue without comments. Tags: senate judiciary committee cspan transcript arlen specter part 6 alberto gonzales 7/24/07 cssjcagpt672407

User: Google

Nicole Wong Testifies before Senate Judiciary Committee Nicole Wong, Deputy General Counsel for Google, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law at a May 20, 2008 hearing on Global Internet Freedom. Topics of discussion include Google's commitment to freedom of expression, our efforts to meet challenges posed by legal and cultural barriers to the free flow of information, and the role of governments in reducing Internet censorship and promoting free expression. Tags: google nicole wong senate judiciary

User: cspander

Senate Judiciary Committee w/Alberto Gonzales-7/24/07 Pt11 Part 11 of 32 Senate Judiciary Committee with Alberto Gonzales. Senator Jon Kyl questions Gonzales. 7/24/07 KEEP IN MIND: Gonzales was given each and every question he would be asked beforehand. Nothing was a surprise - there was absolutely NO "GOTCHA!" Transcript of this portion of the hearing: KYL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Attorney General, as I understand it -- and I'm going to ask you to correct me if I'm wrong, to your knowledge -- the administration position on Guantanamo Bay is that, while it would be nice if we didn't have the need for it and we'd like to be able to close it, we can't because the terrorists who represent a threat to the United States need to be held somewhere and there are no better alternatives. KYL: Almost nobody wants them in the United States. You can't just let them go. Sending them to foreign countries is problematic, among other reasons for the reasons you discussed. Is that your understanding? And, if not, what is your understanding? GONZALES: Yes. KYL: Do you have any different reasons for desiring to close Gitmo, for example, because to your knowledge or suspicion, is there anything going on down there that might be a violation of either U.S. law or applicable treaties or conventions? GONZALES: Quite the contrary. I think if people who have gone down there in this body, from the House, other countries, have come away favorably impressed with what's going on down there. KYL: I just want to associate myself with the remarks of Senator Hatch. It would be nice if we didn't have to have any prisons for that matter. And it would certainly be good if we didn't have to have a place for these threats to America. But they do have to be held somewhere, and I know of no better alternative than where they're being held right now. Let me ask you this question about a matter that you know I'm very interested in -- and as a matter of fact in a related, potentially related, matter, there is a scandal now brewing with regard to the National Basketball Association. Sports entities, in particularly the NFL, major league baseball, basketball, the NCAA -- amateur athletics, have for a long time been concerned about Internet betting, which is illegal under most state laws and we have our federal laws as well. You have -- and you're aware that on October 13th the president signed into law the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act to augment enforcement efforts by targeting offshore gambling operations that are not readily subject to U.S. prosecution. KYL: There are additional, existing laws -- the Federal Wire Act and money laundering laws that can be and have been used to go after these Internet gambling operators. I realize that you can't comment on any existing cases, but I'd like for you to just express to the committee generally what your views are with respect to the department's intentions with respect to going after these illegal Internet gambling operations. GONZALES: Thank you, Senator. I appreciate your leadership on this issue. We do believe it's a serious issue because, when you talk about Internet gambling, it's highly-addictive. Quite frankly, I think it affects our youth. I think it can be tied to money laundering and fraud, and we think it's tied to organized crime. There are existing laws on the books, and we can and do enforce those laws. There are challenges because of the existing laws, challenges because, much of the time, the evidence is offshore. We may have difficulty in getting the evidence. Also, because it involves another country, there are sometimes serious issues of extradition. So we appreciate the additional tools of this Unlawful Internet Gambling Act which bans certain financial payments to support Internet Gambling. And, as you know, Treasury and the Federal Reserve have primary responsibility for the issuance of these regulations after consulting with the Department of Justice. We've provided input, and so my understanding is that those regs are moving forward. KYL: The regs -- the proposed regs have been made public. My question really was a broader one. You have engaged in prosecutions under other laws as well, and I was simply giving you an opportunity to express your intentions to continue to enforce all of these laws to the extent that they need to be enforced. GONZALES: We certainly intend to do that, and you have my commitment, Senator. KYL: Incidentally, I may have not been clear in my reference to the NBA. I'm not suggesting that there's evidence of illegal Internet gambling with respect to that, but simply wanted to point out that these sports depend on the public's view that they are unadulterated, that they're clean, that they are not being affected by illegal forces. And that's why they're so supportive of this legislation, to make sure that illegal Internet gambling does not, in any way, intrude into those sports. And I think Americans have a right to have that assurance. Mr. Attorney General, the FBI is facing a mounting caseload of applications from foreign nationals seeking to enter the United States or to adjust status. The FBI, of course, does background checks, but there is a huge backlog, as you know. What technologies or resources can Congress secure for the FBI to ensure that's it's able to timely process applications without compromising the safety and security of the American people? GONZALES: This is a problem that I have discussed with the director. You're talking about background checks, individuals from other countries. It does take us a long time in some cases, because of the fact it requires us to get information and records from other countries. I know that the director is focused on trying to get additional resources, additional individuals, maybe contract work out to helping in this endeavor. And so he's also looking at new computer system technology, taking advantage of technology... KYL: Let me just interrupt because of the time. There's a huge backlog. It shouldn't exist. Do we need to provide additional resources, Congress? GONZALES: I don't know whether or not additional resources are required from the Congress. I do know that additional resources within the bureau have to be focused on this issue. And it may be -- the director may come to me and say, "Well, if we do that, we're not going to be able to protect America from terrorism the way we ought to be in other areas." And so I don't know the answer to that. But certainly more resources are necessary. We may already have the resources within the bureau. I suspect the director will say no. KYL: We need to know if there's something else we can do, because you cannot compromise security and we cannot tolerate the long backlogs that currently exist. So something needs to give here. And if it is that we need more resources, Congress needs to be advised. Let me quickly, while I have just a second, ask one final question. A U.S. Customs and Border Protection -- DHS reports that 16 percent of foreign nationals apprehended illegally crossing the southern border have criminal histories. That's about 140,000 individuals in the year 2005. And if that's not alarming enough, DOJ and the GAO indicate that criminal aliens in the U.S. are re-arrested on an average of six to eight times per offender, which puts a huge strain on both federal, state and local law enforcement officers, prosecutors, courts and our jails. Is the Department of Justice undertaking any initiatives with DHS to proactively identify and prosecute and remove criminal aliens? And, here again, is there any authority or resource that Congress needs to provide to DOJ to assist in the prosecution of these criminal aliens? GONZALES: I think that, quite candidly, Senator, if you were to talk to my board of U.S. attorneys, they would say we need more resources. And so, we're always looking at ways to try to find those resources within the existing budget. Obviously the president has to consider a number of priorities with respect to the budget that he submits to the Congress. And the Congress, of course, ultimately makes the decision as to where those priorities should come out. But we're having to be smart. We're trying to have -- to be more efficient. But it does present or has presented some challenges for us. KYL: In effect -- Mr. Chairman, could I just do one follow-up question? In effect, are you saying... LEAHY: Go ahead. KYL: ... you understand the president's budget priorities and needs all across the government but, if more resources could be made available to you, you could certainly take advantage of them, could certainly use them? GONZALES: We certainly would put them to good use. LEAHY: Of course, you're also aware that the president said if we put any money in there beyond what he's asked for, he'll veto the bill? Tags: senate judiciary committee transcript cspan jon kyl part 11 alberto gonzales 7/24/07 cssjcagpt1172407

User: melnacis

Westbam & The Love Committee - United States of love Love Parade baby! Tags: Westbam The Love Committee United States of love Loveparade 2006

User: neurocameraman

Textbook Committee (GBV cover band) at Hexagon This Guided by Voices tribute band drove all the way up from Chicago and played for a modest crowd at Hexagon Bar in the midst of one of Minneapolis' worst blizzards in years, 2/24/2007. Everyone in the room seemed to be having a great time, and the band barely held their liquor through the end of the night. Tags: textbookcommittee guidedbyvoices gbv hexagonbar textbook committee hexagon bar

User: RonPaulPEC

RP PEC Video Ron Paul PEC Video Tags: politics

User: isaac8399

David Bowie - Cygnet Committee Space Oddity album Lyrics: I bless you madly, sadly as I tie my shoes I love you badly, Just in time, at times, I guess Because of you I need to rest Because it's you that sets the test So much has gone and little is new And as the sparrow sings Dawn chorus for Someone else to hear The Thinker sits alone growing older And so bitter "I gave Them life I gave Them all They drained my very soul ...dry I crushed my heart to ease Their pains No thought for me remains there Nothing can They spare What of me? Who praised Their efforts to be free? Words of strength and care and sympathy I opened doors that would have blocked Their way I braved Their cause to guide, for little pay I ravaged at my finance just for Those Those whose claims were steeped in peace, tranquility Those who said a new world, new ways ever free Those whose promises stretched in hope and grace for me" I bless you madly, sadly as I tie my shoes I love you badly, just in time, at times, I guess Because of you I need to rest, oh yes Because it's you that sets the test So much has gone and little is new And as the sunrise stream Flickers on me, My friends talk Of glory, untold dream, where all is God and God is just a word "We had a friend, a talking man Who spoke of many powers that he had Not of the best of men, but Ours We used him We let him use his powers We let him fill Our needs Now We are strong And the road is coming to its end Now the damned have no time to make amends No purse of token fortune stands in Our way The silent guns of love will blast the sky We broke the ruptured structure built of age Our weapons were the tongues of crying rage Where money stood We planted seeds of rebirth And stabbed the backs of fathers Sons of dirt Infiltrated business cesspools Hating through Our sleeves Yea, and We slit the Catholic throat Stoned the poor on slogans such as 'Wish You Could Hear' 'Love Is All We Need' 'Kick Out The Jams' 'Kick Out Your Mother' 'Cut Up Your Friend' 'Screw Up Your Brother or He'll Get You In the End' And We Know the Flag of Love is from Above And We Can Force You to Be Free And We Can Force You to Believe" And I close my eyes and tighten up my brain For I once read a book in which the lovers were slain For they knew not the words of the Free States' refrain It said: "I believe in the Power of Good I Believe in the State of Love I Will Fight For the Right to be Right I Will Kill for the Good of the Fight for the Right to be Right" And I open my eyes to look around And I see a child laid slain on the ground As a love machine lumbers through desolation rows Ploughing down man, woman, listening to its command But not hearing anymore Not hearing anymore Just the shrieks from the old rich And I Want to Believe In the madness that calls 'Now' And I want to Believe That a light's shining through Somehow And I Want to Believe And You Want to Believe And We Want to Believe And We Want to Live Oh, We Want to Live We Want to Live We Want to Live We Want to Live We Want to Live We Want to Live I Want to Live I Want to Live I Want to Live I Want to Live I Want to Live I Want to Live Live Live Live Tags: david bowie cygnet committee space oddity rock folk

User: RadiantBlueLight

Ron Paul Lectures Bernanke: U.S. Moving Towards Fascism Ron Paul Lectures Bernanke: U.S. Moving Towards Fascism Joint Economic Committee 4-2-2008 Tags: Ron Paul Bernanke Joint Economic Committee

User: aliceangel7

Clinton Supporter Kicked Out of Rules Committee Meeting! Is this the face of the angry white female backlash against Obama? It seems there is now some much needed unity in the party, but is it enough for Obama to win over all of Clinton's constituencies, especially women. This is one of the many of Hillary's supporters who were manhandled out of the ballroom at the Washington, D.C., hotel where the Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) was meeting. The demonstrators wanted a full tally of Florida and Michigan's delegate votes. Instead, the committe is giving Florida and Michigan half-votes for each towards the final tally for a party nominee. Some Clinton Supporter were Kicked Out of Rules Committee Meeting. Yes, there have been sexist attacks on Clinton and her white female supporters, as well as on female journalists and bloggers. Yes, there has been plenty of racism and reverse racism, and still more to come. One irate supporter let rip; "I'm proud to be an older American woman!" "I'm not going to shut my mouth anymore!" "the democrats are throwing the election away as well as asking, for what? An inadequate black male who would not have been running had there not been a white woman that was running for president!" yelled New Yorker Harriet Christian. Let's not forget Michael Pfleger's attack on Clinton last week. The priest from Obama's chutch went out of his way to mock Clinton's race and gender. Things got nasty as a Long Island School teacher got bruised by security at the meeting (lucky they didn't have tarers). Obama now has 2,051 delegates to Hillary's 1,876 delegates. Harriet Christian parting shot: "Our Democratic Party threw us down the tubes! And they think we won't turn and vote for McCain? Well, I got news for all of you: McCain will be the next president of the United States!" "I'm voting for McCain in 08!" Interesting, she could be a political operative for McCain, just stirring things up a little. I'd like to share this comment i received from a Youtube member about this clip: As a senior white female, I was pleased and excited to see a woman run for president, but after doing research and following the campaign trail, my support as turn from Senator Clinton to Senator Obama. For many reasons. 1: economics = the general public doesn't realize that the economy takes years to come to the effect it has, therefore, even if one thinks that the President Clinton years was prospers, it was just the cake being made and President Bush but the icing on it. 2: ever since the Reagan years the off shore dealings and other economic results, along with the insiders lobbyists that has been around since the beginning of time, then years after years up to the current administration. People weren't living in a bubble put over them for over 30 years. Therefore, they thought the Clinton years were great, this was a falsehood and then came the Bush years, which only added another fantasy. 3: not to say Senator Obama doesn't have ties, but, truly how close we don't know at this time, we must give ourselves at least a chance for the future generation. 4: the Clintons are Lobbyists and Off Shores - China, India, Columbia, etc., they have baggage that will definitely put this country into an already RECESSION! 5: Senator Clinton is not a bad person, just someone caught up the the tenatcles of the Good Old Boys Club, and she is in so deep she can't see the light! Which makes her a dangerous wolf in sheep (pants suit) coat! 6: Therefore, we must as Positive People look to the Future and let the New Generation on Educated and Solid ground take over and the past is history to learn from, not discard but truly learn. If we seriously want to clean house we must stop the Dividing of all Americans and Take the Positive High Road and include everyone, no matter who we are, in all scenarios of life. Thanks for all your comments. A :) How many women in the Democrat Party feel as Harriet Christian does, that the Democrat Party is stomping on them and denying them access and equal rights? Tags: Clinton Harriet Christian Obama DNC Barack Hillary rant Democratic Committee Rules Meeting Washington RBC protester

User: AntiConformist911

Rep. Robert Wexler (FL) @ Rules and Bylaws Committee /Part 2 12:02 p.m: Wexler is yelling. "We must find a way...to resolve this situation so that Florida may participate in this historic nominating process that will soon come to a close." ... Says the rules provide for a reduction in the NUMBER of pledged delegates... Wexler announces Obama campaign's support for Ausman petition... -- says it would award Clinton a net 19 delegates... "Sen. Obama should be commended for his willingness to offer this extraordinary concession.... " 11:58 :Wexler acknowledges that the election was held without a compliant delegate election plan; "both Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton pledged not to campaign in Florida and both agreed at the time that the primary would not count. This contest was not a normal primary election." Argues that Obama's decision to follow the rules. Wexler notes said that the RBC told the campaigns that the process was non-binding; addresses a "canard;" this is "completely untrue." Wexler downplays the Obama campaign's roll in pushing against a new Florida primary. http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/rbc_meeting_live_wire_two.php RBC member Alice Huffman asks why a full delegate seating would be tantamount to be disunity. Wexler: "Respectfuly, I wish you had asked this question last year." Huffman says she couldn't have envisioned the future Wexler declares that no one supports voters rights more than he does. Harold Ickes then asks Wexler why he thinks Obama has conceded anything. Wexler: "What we are saying is that up to the number 19, which is the maximum amount allowable under the Ausman petition and your rules, we the Obama campaign ... have agreed to a concession..." He notes that "In the state of Ohio and the state of Pennsylvania together, Sen. Clinton won a total of 19 delegates.." (He means NET delegates)... http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/05/rbc_meeting_live_wire_3_clinto.php As the DNC prepares to decide the fates of the Florida and Michigan delegations...it turns out that while the Florida primary turnout was high relative to past primaries within the state, the relative Democratic turnout vs. the Republican primary lagged way behind relative party turnout in other primaries and caucuses across the country, where the voting counted from the start. And in Michigan in particular, the voting level there was simply abysmal. This suggests the possibility that far more Democratic voters would have come out in both states if they'd expected the contests to count, meaning that it's hard to argue that the primaries that actually took place really reflected the will of the people...Democratic primaries and caucuses have had proportionately much higher turnout than Republican contests...In a year when Democratic primaries had disproportionately high turnout compared to the GOP, it tells us something if a particular state's Dem contest was disproportionately low...two particular states were behind the Kerry baseline by a serious margin: Florida, where relative Democratic turnout was a few points behind Kerry's vote percentage -- and Michigan, where relative Dem turnout lagged behind Kerry's vote by a whopping 11 points. It makes sense that Michigan would suffer more from this problem, as Barack Obama and John Edwards had both taken their names off the ballot in recognition that the state wouldn't count, while Clinton kept her name in the race. As a result, many Obama and Edwards supporters would have failed to show up just to vote "Uncommitted" in a race that they were told wouldn't matter under the rules, and even some Clinton supporters wouldn't have viewed it as worth the time and effort. Indeed, the Michigan turnout wasn't even halfway decent by the standards of state-level Michigan primaries. The 2002 primary for governor saw over 400,000 more people turn out than this year's presidential primary, and the second and third-place finishers had almost as many votes combined as this year's presidential race had in total...if these two states had held recognized contests with turnout in line with the best-fit curve for the other states, it seems likely that many more voters would have turned out -- possibly as many as one million in Florida, and over half a million in Michigan -- and we simply can't know how those people would have voted. These simple facts render both contests, especially Michigan, seriously dubious as actual measurements of the will of each state's electorate. http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/primaries.php Tags: Barack Obama Hillary Clinton John Mccain Montana South Dakota Iraq war George Bush bill iran puerto rico primary edwards

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20