I listened to Bugliosi’s speech about his latest book, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, given on 6/25/08 and carried by C-SPAN2on 8/3/08 – here’s what I heard [while scanning Marlins boxscores]:

• 9:00 – Began – much background about himself and tellingly describes how outraged he was about the Supreme Court ruling which ended appeals to the 2000 election – admits to orneriness in his old age – thinks Ken Starr is one of the most contemptible individuals in the US
• 9:35 – 1st factual point – Bush gave a speech claiming Iraq was an imminent danger 6 days after receiving a classified intelligence memo which indicated that Iraq would only be a danger to US if it was worried about being attacked themselves
• 9:40 – 2nd point – Manning memo – An aide to Prime Minister Tony Blair wrote a memo which summarized a meeting between Bush and Blair which indicated that Bush had speculated on how to draw Iraq into a conflict, even if under false pretenses
• 9:47 – 3rd point – Bush smiles in public and seems in good spirits, all during a period where people are dying in Iraq. He quotes friends who claim that Bush is a happy man and asks, “What type of a monster is this man?”

Later, taking questions from the audience, he made the following points:

• Will conduct a search [American Libel?] for a prosecutor in America who would agree to bring murder charges against Bush once he leaves office. He would prefer the death sentence as punishment.
• During an attack on the left wing in America, which he feels is intimidated, he quotes Mario Cuomo as saying that ‘he admires Rush Limbaugh,’ and states, “How is that humanly possible.”
• Defended Bill Clinton for being attacked for what he considers consensual sex with Monica Lewinsky [this should earn him a J-ESPY, given each year to the public figure who most resembles the quintessential lost WWII Japanese soldier who won’t give up the fight when there is no longer a fight – JC].
• Warns about Bush fleeing to Paraguay once he leaves office.

His strongest point would seem to be the Manning memo, yet it was odd to hear him put so much emphasis on that and not comment on Blair’s role in the meeting and the overall war. The reason seems clear, Blair is liked, Bush is hated, keep the emphasis on Bush. That strategy makes sense if you want to sell books and be a hero to the left, but not if the truth is your goal.

I read and enjoyed Helter Skelter a long time ago. His book about the OJ Simpson case – Outrage – made great practical arguments [e.g. who would bleed all over their home after a cut]. But I thought it was odd when his previous book about the Kennedy assassination, ignored that other books, especially Case Closed, had effectively ended the Oswald conspiracy theories. It did however give Bugliosi something in common with Seth Rogan and his buddies in Knocked Up, both realized too late that someone else had already executed their payday idea – The Skinny meets Mr Skin.

The crowd, as would naturally be expected, were revealed during the Q&A as heavy-duty left-wingers. It was odd to hear such a crowd cheer at the thought of Bush being executed. How depressing, it means those grating advertising-types have a point when they claim that ‘it’s all how you frame it’ [or who you frame]. After all, I’m assuming they are normally anti-death penalty types. Apparently they make exceptions for republicans.

The worse thing I can say about such a noted former prosecutor is that his arguments were unconvincing and even laughable [Bush should not smile] at times.