bmaz over at Emptywheel provides contact information for the Tamm defense fund:

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/12/15/the-thomas-tamm-legal-defense-fund/

If Barack Obama does one thing, I hope it's that he initiate investigations of this. I've been disappointed by most of his appointments until he named Leon Panetta as CIA chief, and the accompanying Fienstein snub. It was an inspired choice and I hope it signals that he really intends to rein in the lawlessness and investigate what has happened over the past eight years.

Does Tamm have a legal defense fund?

I for one would be more than willing to contribute to it.

He does. I'm going to interview him, probably sometime this week, and post information about it.

He hasn't really been able to find steady work because of the prosecution, and law firm fees are suffocating (he faces the horrible dilemma of going broke hiring a good defense lawyer or being basically unprotected as a very serious DOJ criminal investigation against him proceeds, one that could, worst-case scenario, result in a long prison term).

typo in the headline

Myths shape the cosmos in which we enact the theater of Life.

[[[Absolute Elite Supremacy / Our Common Weal///[[[{{{Absolute Demos Subjugation}}}]]]]]]

• This expression reads: "An elite minority asserts privileged access to and dominance over our Common Weal, simultaneously and absolutely denying a subjugated group."

Substitute any dom/sub pairing you like. Take Israel and the Occupied Territories, for example.

The slashes and brackets represent all the divisions we hide behind, including the most intimate: the illusory self/other divide. Not only every brick & mortar wall ever built: every racist epithet and Jim Crow law; every Klansman's hood and our own self-deceptions, etc.

For example, where, precisely, do "you" stop and the rest of us begin? Where is the self/other divide? Can you locate it for me? Can you put your finger on it?

Of what is it made? How does it function? Since there is obviously stuff going in and out all the time across this "barrier," then isn't any delineation of an absolute boundary an arbitrary imposition by the delineator?

If there really was an absolute boundary, one self from it's equal and opposite, then you wouldn't be able to breathe, let alone be aware of this right here:

Our shared becoming.

How are these words right here working right now? As self-emptying vessels.

From out of the inchoate ocean of Being, into these words I pour my heart out to you; I click 'submit,' and pass them over to you (a rather Islamic label for an action, eh?); as you pass your eyes over them, they self-empty into your inchoate ocean of being aware of your own becoming, like rain falling into the body of water from which it first arose.

Where was the checkpoint, the border guard, the "no man's zone?" If there exists an absolute divide between us, how are we now experiencing this union of being?

beloved/UNION/Beloved

This is our more perfect Union. Welcome home, Stranger.

"I think it is tragic that a lot of our capability is now across the pages of the newspapers".

Jane Harman

Spoken like a true mafioso. It's a shame "The Family's" law-breaking business is being exposed. God forbid a greater danger to this country than every Middle Eastern terrorist combined should be brought to light.

Meanwhile, people that should be HANGED will go off and live their golden years getting high on emotion-flattening drugs and shooting pheasants. Absolutely disgusting!

Here's Tamm's legal defense fund address:

Thomas Tamm Legal Defense Fund

Bank of Georgetown

5236 44th Street

Washington, DC 20015

http://www.zachalexander.com/politics/2008/12/the-thomas-tamm-legal-defense-fund/

What do the Bushes & Cheneys have on Pelosi, Rockefeller, Reid, and Harmon? The wiretapping was alleged to have begun before 9/11 and I can't help but wonder that there's something, if made public, would be career ending for them.

Ever since the DC DEMs regained numerical "control" of the House after November 2006 elections Nancy Pelosi has demonstrated well and often that whatever her motivations for wanting to be in WashingtonDC are they have little to do with wanting to do the right thing,to be a profile in courage or to actually display any integrity of character and leadership.

I believe she was just re-elected as Speaker again with no opposition votes. Evidently the DC DEMs are quite pleased with Nancy Pelosi and her "leadership" team.

I am prepared to give PEBO the benefit of six to nine months of time to establish a record of viewable positions taken/not taken and actions done/not done. If he takes to Pelosi styled WashingtonDC conduct it will truly be a disappointment.

Pelosi? I think Nancy Pelosi should have resigned sometime last year as it is/was and surely Nancy Pelosi should have done so here in Jan.2009 prior to Jan.20,2009. She seems to have not been forthcoming about Bush/Cheney regime conduct she was in on and then used her position to shield from the light of day. Evidently she thinks this is A-OK conduct.Really?

Nancy Pelosi should resign--as a matter of character/integrity for her "politics" of past two years. Evidently Nancy Pelosi sees her record otherwise. No evident shame or sense of personal accountability for or over what she has been doing or not doing during past two years.

I can understand being duped but then making corrections once aware of having been duped. I am not getting any sense of this being so with Nancy. She was in on this stuff. Knowingly so. Did not stop it. Has repeatedly cloaked Bush/Cheney regime conduct with her power to cloak as Speaker.

It fails basic smell tests. I have little respect for Nancy Pelosi anymore.

With the above story GG only underlines why even a little respect is likely too much.

How many synaptic leaps does it take to believe this constant hyperbole flung around by Bush and Harman that: "There will be blood on your hands" if the Times runs with the story?

Reminds me of when Condoleeza Rice urged all the major networks to refrain from showing video footage of Osama Bin Laden for nebulous "security reasons." They complied, didn't they?

And how insulting and disingenous is Frances Fragos Townsend,in the Isikoff article: "There are legal processes in place [for whistle-blowers' complaints]. This is one where I'm a hawk. It offends me, and I find it incredibly dangerous."

Perhaps he should have taken the standard whistleblower route. But if "legal process" in place are already tainted at the highest levels, why would any sane person trust it?