How Would a Grand Jury Indict the Bush Administration.? Read It.
A Highly-Praised Book That Actually Presents a Grand Jury Indictment Against the Bush Administration.
United States v. George W. Bush et al. (Paperback)
By Elizabeth de la Vega
BuzzFlash.com's Review (excerpt)
Yes, a former federal prosecutor who writes for TomDispatch.com, drafts the indictment and presents the case against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Powell to a grand jury.
An incisive thinker and persuasive litigator, de la Vega leaves no doubt that the leaders of the Bush Administration are guilty as charged.
The presentation before the grand jury that de la Vega presents may be hypothetical, but the crimes are not.
Grisham and Turow write gripping legal fiction. Elizabeth de la Vega had a bigger challenge. She had to make a diabolical betrayal into a good read -- and she did.
From Publishers Weekly:
By revisiting public statements, official documents and journalistic reports from the months leading up to the Iraq invasion, de la Vega builds a legal case that President Bush and top members of his administration engaged in a conspiracy to "deceive the American public and Congress into supporting the war." Drawing on her experience as a federal prosecutor, as well as the work of scholars and legal experts, she brings a well-honed legal perspective to the issue.
She presents her argument in transcript form as a hypothetical weeklong presentation to a grand jury, including extensive testimony from three fictional investigative agents. Despite her somewhat specialized approach, the author clearly defines the legal terms and issues and avoids jargon. If anything, the book feels casual and straightforward to a fault.... whenever she focuses on the issues at hand—most compellingly in her final analysis of the administration's spurious claims about Iraq's nuclear weapons program—de la Vega makes a persuasive case.
An incisive thinker and persuasive litigator, de la Vega leaves no doubt that the leaders of the Bush Administration are guilty as charged.
The presentation before the grand jury that de la Vega presents may be hypothetical, but the crimes are not.
Grisham and Turow write gripping legal fiction. Elizabeth de la Vega had a bigger challenge. She had to make a diabolical betrayal into a good read -- and she did.
From Publishers Weekly:
By revisiting public statements, official documents and journalistic reports from the months leading up to the Iraq invasion, de la Vega builds a legal case that President Bush and top members of his administration engaged in a conspiracy to "deceive the American public and Congress into supporting the war." Drawing on her experience as a federal prosecutor, as well as the work of scholars and legal experts, she brings a well-honed legal perspective to the issue.
She presents her argument in transcript form as a hypothetical weeklong presentation to a grand jury, including extensive testimony from three fictional investigative agents. Despite her somewhat specialized approach, the author clearly defines the legal terms and issues and avoids jargon. If anything, the book feels casual and straightforward to a fault.... whenever she focuses on the issues at hand—most compellingly in her final analysis of the administration's spurious claims about Iraq's nuclear weapons program—de la Vega makes a persuasive case.
Read The Full Review >>>
Other Reviews
"Take advantage of this rare opportunity to “sit” with the grand jurors as de la Vega presents a case of prewar fraud that should persuade any fair-minded person who loves this country as much as she so obviously does. Faced with an ongoing crime of such magnitude, she argues, we can not simply shrug our shoulders and walk away."
Learn More >>>
posted by Annamarie at
10:11 PM
0 comment(s):
Post a comment
<< Home