On Jun 13, 11:10В pm, skepticl1
aol.com> wrote:> On 10 Jun, 19:02, oldwifetale
yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> No, it's *not* censored except in the msm. I hate to tell you this,
>> but censorship in the msm has been going on for decades. The
>> censorship is nothing new, it's just a little more blatant and 'in
>> your face' than it used to be.
>
>> I saw the information about Kucinich earlier today on several
>> alternative news sites which are - (yes, believe it or not) - totally
>> available to the general public or anyone who's willing to 'keep up'
>> on who is doing *what* in politics.
>
>> It was also on C-Span.
>
> There has been inattention from most mainstream media on
> Representative Kunicich's attempts at impeachment President Bush.
What else is new?
> There has been disparagement from pseudo progressive websites such as
> 'Slate' and a complete absence of the Impeachment report from the
> Democrat Party's liberal mascot '
MoveOn.org'. On line coverage was
> advanced instead from such liberal sites as 'Rawstory' and 'After
> Downing Street'. As of 5:00 PM today the articles had yet to been
> published on Kucinich's official House website or on CSPAN, which
> aired the presentation live but has thus far failed to provide an on
> line archive of the historic moment. More over Kucinich's campaign
> website, 'Kucinich.US' was disabled without correction by its provider
> which claimed that it was currently unable to handle the requests due
> to a temporary overload.
Don't be so dependent on msm.
It was passed to judiciary which basically makes the whole thing
basically 'null and void' because by the time it would get to the
point of being considered, Bush's term will have ended. So an
impeachment process is too little, too late. At this point, it should
be criminal charges which are never too late.
