VIDEO EXCLUSIVE: VINCENT BUGLIOSI: The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder

On Wednesday, famed Charles Manson prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi spoke to a packed and enthusiastic crowd of more than 350 Angelinos about his new book, “The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder.” While Bugliosi’s talk will eventually appear on C-SPAN, you can view it first in its entirety below…

Part 1 (19:45)

In my book, “The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder,” I present evidence that proves beyond all reasonable doubt that George Bush took this nation to war on a lie, under false pretenses, and therefore under the law is guilty of murder for the deaths of over 4,000 young American soldiers who died so far in this war.

Bugliosi began the evening by explaining to the Los Angeles audience that George W. Bush is guilty of murder, according to the law, if he brought the country to war under false pretenses. And Bugliosi emphasized the legal aspect of the case in order to fend off likely attackers:

So although Bush supporters can argue that Bush should not be prosecuted because they don’t think he did anything wrong, they cannot legitimately say that he should not be prosecuted if he has done what I say he did. To say that is to admit that you have no respect for our American system of justice and democracy and that you would prefer that presidents have the same rights as tyrannical dictators like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Saddam Hussein.

Bugliosi had a similar answer for those who simply believe it is impossible to prosecute Bush for murder:

There’s this sense out there among many that prosecuting Bush for murder can’t be done. Which is the equivalent of saying what - that he is above the law. That ordinary laws simply don’t apply to him.

Bugliosi also had some special words for the American Right Wing which has expressed its disapproval with his book:

The third group of people responding to my book is the nation’s right wing. And they of course have contempt for me and my book. But whatever contempt they have for me, I can assure them and I can assure you I have much much much more contempt for them. There are no more repugnant, hypocritical and un-American – and that’s the word I want to emphasize – un-American people in our society today than the right wing.

Bugliosi, however, made clear that this book was not political for him and even said he would have written the same book had Bush been a Democrat. So fair is Bugliosi that he even offers up some mitigating evidence for Bush and his co-conspirators:

And there is one thing that I should probably say in partial defense of these people that goes in mitigation, arguably reduces their moral culpability. And what I’m talking about is that many of these people are incredibly stupid. And they make up for their stupidity by being extremely ignorant. And when you combine stupidity with ignorance that’s a toxic combination.

Finally, Part 1 ends with the law:

If a conspirator, or anyone for that matter, deliberately sets in motion a chain of events which he knows will cause – that’s the key word – cause a third party innocent agent to commit an act, the defendant is criminally responsible for that act. Bush, in invading Iraq, caused Iraqis to kill American soldiers in much the same fashion that a person causes a gun to fire a bullet that kills someone by pulling the trigger.

Part 2 (17:54)

Part 2 begins with Bugliosi explaining the only way Bush might be innocent of murder:

Bush can only wash his hands of culpability if he did not take this nation to war under false pretenses. If he did, which the evidence overwhelmingly shows, he is criminally responsible for the deaths of all those American soldiers who have died fighting his war in Iraq.

The main issue would be whether or not George Bush went to war, as he always claimed, in self-defense – the so-called pre-emptive strike. Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, alleged as so, therefore he was an imminent threat to the security of this country so Bush had to strike first in self-defense. If the war was not in self-defense but one that the prosecutor can prove Bush took us to under false pretenses than all of the killings of American soldiers in Iraq become unlawful killings and therefore murder.

While Bugliosi's animus was mostly reserved for Bush and his co-conspirators, he did find time to also criticize Ken Starr, The New York Times and the Supreme Court:

I seem to be getting more angry and acerbic and caustic and that’s because I am always in a state of rage. How can I help but be -- the monstrous, grotesque, obscene Ken Starr almost destroyed the Clinton presidency over absolutely nothing while being totally and completely supported and funded by the federal government. They funded his seven year, seventy million dollar effort, the federal government. And the so-called liberal media, The New York Times savaged Clinton on a day to day basis, supported this monstrous, grotesque, obscene figure – one of the most reprehensible figures in American history – Ken Starr.

The US Supreme Court 2000, stopping the recount in Florida which was specifically authorized by Florida law, taking the election away from the American people and appointing George Bush president, one of the biggest crimes in American history.

The heart of Part 2, however, is reserved for Bugliosi's evidence against George W. Bush. And first on the list was Bush's lies to the country that were contrary to the National Intelligence Estimate:

In George Bush’s first speech to the nation on Hussein and Iraq, October 7, 2002 in Cincinnati, Ohio, Bush told Americans that Saddam Hussein was a great danger to this nation either by his attacking us with the so-called weapons of mass destruction or by giving these weapons to a terrorist group to attack us. And Bush said that this attack could happen, ‘on any given day,’ meaning what, that the threat was imminent.

The only big problem for George Bush is that on October the first, six days earlier, the CIA sent Bush its 2002 National Intelligence Estimate – a classified top secret report that represented the consensus opinion of all 16 US federal intelligence agencies on the issue of whether or not Hussein was an imminent threat to the security of this country and on page 8 of that 91 page report it clearly and unequivocally says – and by the way what I’m about to tell you to my knowledge has never been said or never been written or never appeared in any major newspaper or magazine in America – page 8 clearly says that Hussein was not an imminent threat to the security of this country. That he would only be a threat if he feared we were about to attack him.

So we know then, not think but know, that when George Bush told the nation on the evening of October 7th, Cincinnati, Ohio, that Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat to the security of this country, he was telling millions of unsuspecting Americans the exact opposite of what his own CIA was telling him. Now if we had nothing else at all, and there is so much more, that alone shows what, that George Bush took this nation to war on a terrible terrible lie. Therefore all the killings in Iraq became unlawful killings and murder.

But it gets worse! In fact, it gets evil, perverse, sick and criminal:

But it gets worse. It gets worse. October 4th, three days later, Bush and his people had the CIA release an unclassified summary version of the October 1st classified report so that this October 4th unclassified version could be released to the American public and to Congress. This unclassified version came to be known as the White Paper. And in this White Paper that was shown to the American people and to Congress, in which contained the opinion of 16 US intelligence agencies that Hussein was not an imminent threat to the security of this country, that conclusion was completely deleted, completely eliminated. Every single one of these all important words, the most important conclusion in that classified document, was completely deleted from the White Paper. And the question I have of you, is how evil, how perverse, how sick, how criminal can George Bush and his people be?

The next piece of ever damning evidence, according to Bugliosi, is the January 31, 2003, Manning Memo written by Tony Blair's chief foreign policy advisor after a top level meeting in the Oval Office less than two months before the invasion.

He says that George Bush was so worried about the failure of the UN inspectors to find weapons of mass destruction that Bush started to talk about three ways to ‘provoke a confrontation’ with Saddam Hussein. One of which he said was to fly U2 reconnaissance aircraft over Iraq falsely painted in United Nations colors and he said if Saddam fires on those planes it would be a violation of UN resolutions and therefore justify our going to war. So here is George Bush telling Americans, telling the world, that Hussein is an imminent threat to the security of this country, but behind closed doors this very small human being was talking about how to provoke Hussein into a war.

Part 3 (15:50)

Part 3 begins with another piece of evidence against Bush. Mainly, how Bush responded to the ever positive testimony of chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix on March 7, 2003, by throwing him and his team out of the country and quickly invading Iraq. Blix had told the UN Security Counsel that the inspectors were getting proactive cooperation from Saddam Hussein and that their investigation would be completed in a few months:

Blix and his people became Bush’s biggest adversaries because if Blix and his people confirm that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, that would rob Bush of his main argument for war – a war that he wanted to fight at all costs.

The bulk of Part 3, however, does not concentrate on evidence of Bush's guilt but rather Bush's state of mind. Bugliosi takes great offense to the fact that Bush has often described his days as perfect and that he proclaims himself to be so happy:

Even if George Bush was only guilty of making an innocent mistake in taking this nation to war in Iraq, not murder as I firmly believe, with all of the death, horror and suffering he has caused, what type of a monstrous individual is it who could be happy with his life? What type of a human monster is George Bush?

If I ever killed one person in my life, even accidentally – a car accident – I’d never have another perfect day as long as I lived. George Bush is responsible for the horrible deaths of thousands of human beings and he is talking about having a perfect day. Bush’s plans to have a perfect day right in the middle of all the death and horror in Iraq goes so far beyond acceptable human conduct that no moral telescope can discern its shape, form and nature.

Bugliosi concludes by telling the audience that he will not rest or be satisfied until George W. Bush is prosecuted for first degree murder:

I don’t like to see anyone get away with murder, even one murder. [O.J.] Simpson got away with two murders and I got so angry that I wrote a book - Outrage, the Five Reasons O.J. Simpson got away with murder. If I can get so angry about someone getting away with one or two murders you can imagine how I feel about George Bush who has gotten away with over 100,000 murders and has been smiling and enjoying himself throughout the whole period. It may sound presumptuous of me but I can tell you that while I may not succeed, I’m not going to be satisfied until I see George Bush in an American courtroom being prosecuted for first degree murder.

The first degree murder of over 4,000 American soldiers:

If justice means anything at all in America, if we are not going to forget about those 4,000 young American soldiers who came back from Bush’s war in a box, I say we have no choice but to bring murder charges against the son of privilege from Crawford, Texas.

"The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder" (Vincent Bugliosi)

George W. Bush, Ken Starr, Manning Memo, Murder, NIE, Right Wing, Saddam Hussein, Supreme Court, video, Vincent Bugliosi

Comments

[bi]

(thought you'd be interested in this, b/c it's alabama...Siegelman country!)

FOX News, right on schedule, has started the reports of voter fraud by the Democratic Party. Eric Shawn interviewed the Alabama Attorney General, Troy King, who claimed people have been selling their votes. When Shawn finally asked him to identify the Party responsible, King said Democratic counties were involved but stopped short at flatly blaming one party. However, the message was clear.

King noted that the investigation into voter fraud has been going on for four years. He pinpointed Perry County as most problematic and there was a quick clip of voters walking into the polls assumed to be Perry County's and all were African-American. Notice King's stammering when he lays blame on Democrats.

http://www.newshounds.us/2008/06/29/fox_news_reports_alabama_voter_fraud_by_democrats.php

[big dan]

http://www.newshounds.us/2008/06/29/fox_news_reports_alabama_voter_fraud_by_democrats.php

[Anon.]

Part 2 does not work properly. The video stops at about 2 1/2 minutes to show advertising and then stops.

[HPM]

Anon - thanks for the note. I tested the video and it worked fine. Try clearing your cache. Also, I did note that Revver was having a few problems earlier. Thanks.

[OttO]

I guess I'm one of those "stupid" and "ignorant" right-wingers he's talking about, the kind of commentary that doesn't inspire brilliance.

I've heard interviews with Bugliosi after he released the JFK book and I was impressed with both him and the book. While my initial reaction to this new book was to roll my eyes, I thought it may, unlike most of the deranged Bush tripe, be an interesting and provocative read. I read a synopsis then ended up here and his rather juvenile attacks on me and others like me have basically ended my interest in this book and only confirms what I originally suspected: just more hyper-partisan Bush hysteria.

If Bugliosi is so smart and in-tune then maybe he'd tone down the rhetoric so as not to turn people away from his book. After all he doesn't have to convince people who already hate Bush. He could write a book describing how Bush could legally be shot into space in a capsule and they would eat it up. It's people like me who may be curious as to what his legal arguments are but now have no plans on giving money to a person who speaks like an angry teenager in efforts to insult me.

[HPM]

LOL Otto. Forget whether Bugliosi is right. Forget whether Bush is a murderer. Forget that a man walks free while hundreds of thousands of innocents and more than 4,000 American soldiers have been killed. None of that matters to you because you consider yourself part of a larger group which Bugliosi insulted. And once insulted you refuse to review the merits of the case.

And you have the temerity to call Bugliosi juvenile!

[Joe Papa]

That is right OTTO! You are one stupid ass. Bugliosi is brilliant and corageous. Otto why don't you go and fight in Iraq. You won't be missed.

[Rachael Catran]

I would love his e-mail address. I read a couple of his books and I really admire his work. Looking gorward to seeing him on c-span.

[concerned]

im just concerned about bugliosi's ad hominems...i mean keeping a stiff upper lip need not entail a heartless soul. on saying 'im having a perfect day' altho admittedly heartless when juxtaposed with the horrifying fact of dying soldiers. need not expose this 'small man' to the charge of being a monster if the comment had nothing to do with the war...and altho war is undoubtedly the most important concern of a president whose country was at war, a presidents function surely encompasses other concerns that also have to be met. it seems to me, it could be argued that his words or his smiling appearance need not have (may or may not have) betrayed his mind, and may well have been ways of maintaining a positive forward looking outlook on the conduct of the war e.g. success.
we cannot know if his comments were made speaking in his capacity as president or in his capacity as citizen Bush on his time off (it could be argued that just as he isnt a monster, he need not be superhuman either)

it is difficult to argue against the psychology of a man (let alone know his psychology) based on a couple of short comments he made on tv.

on a couple more points: based on the october 1 CIA report, bugliosi's point about Bush's lie seems irrefutable. however, i wonder if an underling couldnt be made to take the blame for this like happenned with the contra-affair.

the logical link between the lie and the murder charge could also be conceivably derailed with a military argument. i mean it could be argued that the majority of iraqi killed (the 100,000 bugliosi mentions) were killed in airstrikes before the groundforces were deployed. the consensual myth among politicians and aerospace engineers (since WWI)persists in the belief that airstrikes work to cause PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder). according to Lt. Col. dave grossman (google: 'panetics: continuity in the nature of war' - these people see airstrikes as the best way to 'save lives' since bombing (it is believed altho mistakenly according to grossman) causes maximum psychological shock/damage to the enemy that will demoralize them into capitulating earlier..obviating the need for ground forces to risk their lives. (you might concede how this argument was and still is convincing bassed on the terrible casulaties of ground forces in WWI)

since the military orders were to launch airstrikes before the ground invasion, bush it could be argued may have sought capitulation and not retaliation from the iraqis and therefore he could potentially be let off the hook for the crime you allege he committed of letting 4000 US soldiers get killed because of iraqi retaliation.

again we cannot know the extent of bush's military expertise here, but if his decisions were tied to expert military advise, again he could potentially be let off the hook as someone who had no reason to question the expert advice he was given (even if it was wrong).

i hope you've thought of these potentials...

[Jack]

When Bush is prosecuted I hope that Blair stands in the dock with him as a co-conspirator. These two immature and arrogant politicians have brought shame and loathing to their respective countries and pain and suffering to hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

The fact that they were able to do what they did is an indictment of the sycophantic politicians around them and the subservient media that we have in the US and the UK.

It's time for Obama and the Democrats to stop pandering to the right wing and stand up confidently and firmly to the bigotry, greed and blinkered religious self righteousness.

When Obama becomes President he should stand fully behind measures to prosecute Bush otherwise he too will be seen as someone without a moral backbone who takes the easy way out for the sake of expediency.

[wondering]

im wondering if the death toll that bugliosi mentions in one lump 4000 US soldiers 'and' 100,000 iraqis...might not be questionable in some ways. sure, if bush took the US to war on false premises...fine. he's guilty. if he was misled however, he lied 'unknowingly'...and that'll be it. A) find a fall guy for him and he shall be let off the hook.

if A can be found, the charge that Bush is guilty of murder, bugliosi's central argument, wouldnt get off the ground. no guilt, no murder.
4000 died, 100,000 died. so what, this was a war..(believed to be a war) perhaps mistaken but bush is free, guilt free..

if bush knowingly took the US to war, on the other hand, and he's found guilty of misleading the public. OK, he's guilty of lying. is he guilty of murder too?

now, is a false war, a war waged on false premises murder...? ironically, couldnt it be argued that a man who orders airstrikes first so as to prevent casualties on to his ground forces (and sincerely believed that this would reduce casualties..) wouldnt this ameliorate the charge of 'murder'.
assuming the charge could be layed when everyone else believed and conducted themselves 'as if' it was a war.. in war, people act to kill in self-defence...this involves the sovereign right of nation states to protect their territorial integrity. this is self-defence of the nation.. but is this the same as personally acting to kill in self-defence. if we cannot prosecute soldiers in a war who kill in self-defence and in the conduct of war for murder...we would have to assume that similarly we cannot label shots fired in a (false war presumed real) to be the equivalent of murder. the iraqi soldiers firing at US soldiers cannot consitute murder. if so, then the third party argument also falls.

Bush is not guilty. end of story.

[jbz]

Bugliosi speaks from my soul... Finally - Someone! Hoping firmly that another brave and skillful prosecutor comes forward to bring this criminal administration before a U.S. court of law as soon as they are "civilians" and no longer have the "power" of their office to throw around. Just seeing them in court defending themselves would be the GREATEST :)

[Mark]

Nicely done. Hope it will come true, but will remain sceptical until it happens.
"Bush is not guilty. end of story." said wondering. This must be a bitter right-wing joke. Hitler wasn't guilty either. The order for the nihilation of the jews was never found.
Cheers all the way from Germany
Mark

[John Handal]

Dear Mr. Bugliosi: I heard the six part youtube.com about prosecuting Bush: I agree with you completely. All the points that you mentioned are not just truthful, but also well known throughout the nation and throughout the World, I know, I talk on the phone to other countries.

The Iraqi "War" (really Invasion for the benefit of private interests), has caused damages of unsuspected proportions, not just in the thousands of precious American lives been lost, but also causing directly or indirectly many hundred of thousands if not millions of innocent Iraqi lives, including kids. Besides the number of handicapped people, Physically or Psychologically is staggering. Not just that, but the reputation of the USA Internationally has suffered irreparable damage.

I could keep on going for a while about more consequences that will stay for the very long run. Prosecuting Bush is not just the right thing to do, but also the smart thing to do ... we need to show the World that after all there is some sort of Justice in America.
Wishing you a successfull outcome in your quest for justice. I am proud of you, sincerely, John Handal.

[Brian]

After watching the videos and reading the reviews, I ordered two copies of the book; one to be delivered to me, the other to be delivered directly to the Attorney General of my state (Oregon). Also I have written a letter to my Attorney General explaining the brief prepared by Mr. Bugliosi and the request to prosecute the criminals for the 68 wrongful deaths of US soldiers from my state, and appended a list of the 68 victims.

In fact, I have also decided to purchase a third copy, and have it delivered to the District Attorney of my county (Lincoln County). There have been four wrongful deaths of US soldiers who were legal residents of my county at the times of their deaths. Let justice prevail!

I invite everyone who believes in truth and justice to send a copy of the book to the AG of your own state, as well as the DA of the county where you reside (providing that there has been at least one wrongful death of a citizen of your county).

[Roundup Logan]

This SOB calls all right wing Americans hypocrits and un-American. Just whole the hell does he think he is? That single statement tells me he's another Michael Moore just full of BS. I don't care if your left wing, right wing, or center of the road, we're all Americans. That's what makes this a great country. To just unilaterally categorize one side or the others as hypocrits and un-American just shows the true colors and character of the individual spewing his nasty venom.

[Roundup Logan]

BTW people - under the Clinton administration there were over 14,000 US soldier deaths. That's double the rate there has been under George Bush. And guess what, we were never at war under Bill Clinton. In fact if anyone is guilty of murder, I'd say Bill Clinton was guilty because he abandonded our soldiers and left them to die in remote regions of the world. That's a stark contrast to our current President who fully supports our soldiers. To accuse George Bush of murder is perposterous. This guy needs to lay off the crack pipe and quit looking for another day in the lime light.

[Pappy B]

To Ronald Logan

Stop posting BS.
Check your facts first
http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/deaths.asp

[NickOtein]

I read with great interest the paper by Vincent Bugliosi, I also watched the video clip.
It gives me great satisfaction to read and hear that some-one with the prowess, knowledge of the law and ability to write in such a manner as he does. I have written to Prime Ministers, bothe here in Australia and the UK, I also wrote to George W. Bush, but never received replies.
I have always considered that the War in Iraq, has been a vendetta, created by George W. Bush, for the assination attempt on his fathers life,
George Snr:
No WoMD: were found in Iraq, but Georeg Jnr: decided that he should bring Saddam Hussein down, in order to create a stepping stone to Iran. In doing so, he caused the great loss of life, not only to US soldiers, but to Australian soldiers, British soldiers and the civilian populace of Iraq, by the retaliating forces of the the Taliban and Osama Bin-Laden guerilla's.
He also caused the Kangaroo Court, that found Saddam Hussein and his two brothers guilty of Murder, commited against Shi-ite's, many years previously.
No doubt Saddam was a Tyrant, but George W. Bush did not have or reserve the right to interfere with Iraq's Government or Law's.
If the evidence can be proven against Bush, then yes he should stand Trial in a Federal Court of his Peers, the American Electorate.

[hapenny]

"If justice means anything at all in America...." Thanks, Mr. Bugliosi, for giving me hope that it does mean something!

[best video]

I have always considered that the War in Iraq, has been a vendetta, created by George W. Bush, for the assination attempt on his fathers life,