Vincent Bugliosi is an experienced lawyer and prosecutor, not often given to extreme statements.  His article in the February 5 edition of The Nation would seem, however, to fall into that category.  Entitled "None Dare Call It Treason," the article tears apart the decisions of the Supreme Court in the recent election and labels the five Republican justices as criminals who belong in prison.  He cited no specific law that was broken, stating that the gang members could be called criminals only in the eyes of the natural law or basic principles of justice.

On the whole I believe Mr. Bugliosi was the soul of reason and not extreme in the least.  Indeed, I believe he did not go far enough because he did not lay out a plan for imposing penalties on the miscreants based upon the existing evidence.      

Big questions remain as to what penalties can properly be imposed within our legal system on the members of the Gang of Five and, of course, on their illegitimate child to whom they improperly handed the presidency. Mr. Bugliosi talks, quite correctly, of issuing severe and continuing moral condemnation.  I agree, pressed down and running over.

However, I also suggest that the best legal minds now concentrate on drafting strategies for actual legal actions against all six of them, as joint co-conspirators or separately.  Many years of legal experience provide me with little precise knowledge of how to proceed in this alien situation.  With some humility, therefore, I suggest a few beginning steps for the Democratic Party and  others interested in securing justce.

First, look into the ethical standards that govern continuing bar membership in the jurisdictions where the five justices are admitted to practice.  In all states there are provisions for revoking licenses to practice law in situations where immoral and unethical conduct can be proven without the necessity of proving criminal conduct.  Of course, it may be possible at some point to prove criminal conduct, based upon a specific statute, but that is not necessary in disbarment proceedings.  In any event, forcing the unethical five to defend themselves from disbarment proceedings will itself impose penalties on them and will leave an indelible and justified mark on them forever.

Second, research the basis for impeachment of the illegal tenant of the oval office. Insufficient attention has been paid to his generalship of the entire campaign to prevent the counting of legal votes in Florida.  That generalship was not, I submit, targeted at minorities (although it appears minority rights were violated.) Rather, the Austin-based war was aimed at preventing the counting of apparently legal votes, which actions may well have been in violation of some civil and criminal laws of Florida and the United States. The apparent conspiracy was carried out against any vote for Al Gore, whatever the race of the voter. It was justified as a normal, good old-fashioned political-legal campaign, but it wasn't.  My hope is that an investigation can be conducted to determine if there is a sound legal basis for bringing articles of impeachment before the House because of high crimes and misdemeanors within the meaning of the U.S. Constitution.

Third, we must consider related impeachment proceedings against the judicial Gang of Five.

Our entire being as a nation has been assaulted.  We cannot simply forgive and forget, no more than we could do so in regard to the Pearl Harbor attack. 

It remains to be seen if the leaders of the Democratic Party have the intestinal fortitude to even consider such drastic though necessary measures.

February 13, 2001