"Impeach Cheney First" - Revisited

Suddenly, impeachment is no longer “off the table.” Indeed, it has emerged as a prominent topic in the news media.

I assert that it is time to revisit how the 9/11 Truth Community can seek justice for the evident 9/11 crimes and wars – and that impeachment is ONE approach for seeking “redress of grievances,” one granted in the US Constitution.

In early 2006, the “Impeach Cheney First” movement was in full swing and I was an active part of it. This goal of impeaching Vice President Dick Cheney gave purpose and focus to the 9/11 Truth Movement, and united us with other groups such as the anti-war movement. Perhaps it is a fitting time to revisit seeking justice for those who are clearly implicated as having leading roles in orchestrating or facilitating the tragedy of 9/11/2001.

In my talks and media interviews, I often referred to the testimony before the 9/11 Commission of (then) Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta regarding Dick Cheney, which testimony was NOT included in the 9/11 Commission report. But we have copies of the video-taped recording of his testimony.

Mineta stated: “ “During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out."
“And when it got down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the Vice President, "Do the orders still stand?“
“And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"

I referred listeners to the Journalof911Studies.com for further research and insights into this interchange.

Kevin Ryan's excellent book, “Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects” states: “When questioned by the 9/11 commission, Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta testified that he came to the PEOC … around 9:20 a.m., and Cheney was already there. Mineta said that Cheney had an exchange with a “young man” who came in and out over a period of time, giving Cheney updates about an incoming plane and asking if “the orders still stand.” Mineta's testimony indicated that Cheney was aware of Flight 77 as it was approaching Washington, before the official account says that anyone knew, and that he had issued orders about the incoming plane. What those orders were has never been revealed but Mineta has consistently stood by his testimony.”

So it is high time to find out – by means of subpoenaed testimony – just what those orders were, and why Cheney treacherously did NOTHING to stop the incoming plane that killed over 170 people at the Pentagon that day.

According to April Gallop who was in the Pentagon when it was hit – and was knocked out and crippled – there was NO warning to her that a plane was incoming, no warning to seek safety. She has a right to protest that no warning was issued when clearly Vice President Cheney was well aware of the incoming danger.

In public talks, I also referred to the firing by Dick Cheney of Secretary of Treasury Paul O'Neill. In one slide, I stated of O'Neill: “He challenged this idea of going after Iraq, and specifically challenged the shift to pre-emptive war promoted by Dick Cheney and others. He opposed Dick Cheney when Cheney said “Deficits don’t matter.”
Sec’y O’Neill was fired by Dick Cheney in 2001.”

This seems to be the common fate of 9/11 whistleblowers (including myself, a full Professor of Physics at BYU). Following public fan-fare regarding his 9/11 testimony about Dick Cheney and the lack of air-defenses on 9/11, Mineta was pressed to resign in June 2006.

The same month, I and others appeared on C-Span to report our scientific findings and suspicions regarding 9/11.  See: https://www.c-span.org/person/?stevenjones

I continued to call for impeachment of Dick Cheney, specifically for his role in obstructing air-defenses that day, his support of torture contrary to Geneva conventions, the firing of Mineta and O'Neill, and his lies to the American public which certainly influenced the aggressive attack on Iraq and the trillions of dollars spent in the 9/11 wars in the Middle East. Th 9/11 wars evidently enriched Cheney personally owing to his close connections with Halliburton.

At this period as the “Impeach Cheney First” movement was gaining traction, US Congressman Dennis Kucinich introduced Articles of Impeachment against Dick Cheney. But these efforts were unfortunately stopped; speaker Pelosi said that impeachment was “off the table.”

As a side note, I had talked to my department chair at BYU about my strong sense that Cheney needed to be impeached (tried per the US Constitution) – that I was seeking “redress of grievances” as protected in the US Bill of Rights. This was in early 2006. He approved of my doing this as a private American citizen, but during the summer of 2006, instructed me NOT to further discuss impeachment of Dick Cheney.  I reluctantly followed that counsel. Nevertheless, on September 6, 2006, I was informed that I was placed on Administrative Leave and informed that I would no longer be permitted to teach at BYU. (It is well known that BYU publicized their action in a public press release.)

A fact that is less known is that Vice President Dick Cheney's office was in contact with BYU officials (as also reported in local newspapers, although it is not known just when that contact began) – and then Mr. Cheney was honored at the April 2007 BYU Commencement exercises with an Honorary PhD for public service. This signal honor to Cheney was just three months after my “early-retirement” from BYU in January 2007.

There are photos in the local newspapers showing Cheney receiving his PhD from BYU officials with great fan-fare.
Another fact that stands out in my mind is that BYU allowed TWO on-campus protests at BYU versus Dick Cheney in 2007 before they gave Cheney an honorary Doctoral Degree. BYU is a campus where public protests are essentially unheard of. I participated in both of these protests on BYU Campus.

Now, when I was placed on Administrative Leave at BYU, I requested a subsequent hearing in writing. As reported in the Deseret News, I wanted such a hearing. But my request was denied (perhaps they had good reason?) and AFTER that, I signed early-retirement papers, reluctantly accepting the early-retirement/resignation option.

My treatment was similar to that inflicted on O'Neill and Mineta – and others who have stood up to Dick Cheney or testified regarding what really happened on 9/11/2001. I was publicly chastened and lost my position. Barry Jennings, who testified of explosions inside WTC 7 that day before the collapse of either WTC Tower, was not so fortunate – and his untimely death should be investigated. If you are unfamiliar with this important case, please see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LO5V2CJpzI also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRaKHq2dfCI

I think it is high time to let the truth be known, and to seek justice regarding government officials and others who clearly had a role in impeding the US air-defenses on that day or in other nefarious activities including cover-ups. Those who profited in millions from short-sales of airline stocks – and from the 9/11 wars – would also be disclosed and investigated.

Justice would be served via an impeachment proceeding for “high crimes and misdemeanors”, but with the current state of the US Congress and Senate, this approach seems unlikely to succeed – although even trying will signal our earnestness in getting to the bottom of this.

More likely to succeed would be some type of criminal investigation or a wrongful-death suit, or an international trial based on war-crimes. There are certain government and University employees (not just at BYU) who would be subpoenaed and asked to testify openly, including Norman Mineta and the “young man” who challenged Dick Cheney's “orders.” A Grand Jury has subpoena power and seems a good option, an approach now being used by Robert Mueller against the Trump administration.

It is NOW a moral challenge for us to stand up and seek for JUSTICE, a fair public trial, of government officials or employees (including some at NIST) who are implicated in contributing to the “shock-and-awe” tragedy of 9/11 or its cover-up.  It is not too late for unified action.

Kevin R. Ryan, "Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects"

David Griffin, "Bush and Cheney: How They Ruined America and the World"

Tad Walch, "BYU places '9/11 truth' professor on paid leave," http://www.deseretnews.com/article/645199800/BYU-places-911-truth-professor-on-paid-leave.html

Tad Walch and Sara Israelsen, "20,000 to hear Cheney at BYU: He'll get honorary doctorate," http://www.deseretnews.com/article/660215205/20000-to-hear-Cheney-at-BYU-Hell-get-honorary-doctorate.html

Steven Jones, Robert Korol, Anthony Szamboti, Ted Walter, 15 YEARS LATER: ON THE PHYSICS OF HIGH-RISE BUILDING COLLAPSES. This article now has over 580,000 reads/views, by far the most widely-read scientific article in this journal of the European Physical Society. https://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/abs/2016/04/epn2016474p21/epn2016474p21.html

Brian Kalt, "Why I Think Presidents Can Be Impeached Even After Leaving Office"

Amy Goodman, "Cheney Facing Widespread Opposition at BYU Commencement Address." “3,000 students, professors, alumni and church members have signed a petition opposing the selection of Cheney and the decision to award him an honorary doctorate. Anti-Cheney protests have also been held.” https://www.democracynow.org/2007/4/26/cheney_facing_widespread_opposition_at_byu#transcript

Martin Stolz, "Rare Protests at Brigham Young Over a Planned Cheney Appearance"

Rosalie Westenskow, "BYU OKs Cheney protest"
"From all indications, Cheney is responsible for the manipulation of intelligence used as a pretext for declaring war on Iraq, the abuse of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and domestic wiretapping," the letter reads. "There is every reason to question Cheney's ethics, including the conviction of his former chief of staff, Scooter Libby, Halliburton's financial gain from bloodshed and many other scandals."  http://www.deseretnews.com/article/660207174/BYU-OKs-Cheney-protest.html

Ralph Nader, "Cheney and the BYU 25"



BYU gives Dick Cheney honorary PhD.jpg112.29 KB

Thanks also to Frances Shure, Ken Jenkins and Mick Harrison

I want to thank Frances Shure, Ken Jenkins and Mick Harrison for their comments before this blog was published.

In particular, Mick Harrison is a lawyer with a keen interest in achieving justice for the 9/11 debacle. We are communicating about what to do to seek justice, and your input is invited.

Here is Mick's talk in Denver on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsGVXZoMMKU


Serious doubts about Norman Mineta's account

I think it is worth being very cautious about Norman Mineta's account of Cheney's actions in the PEOC, supposedly before the Pentagon was attacked. I think there is compelling evidence that clearly shows that Cheney could only have left his office and headed to the PEOC sometime after 9:35 a.m. He therefore would have arrived in the PEOC after 9:37 a.m., when the Pentagon was hit.

The strongest evidence is some of the photos that were released to PBS Frontline in July 2015. For example, if you zoom in on this photo of Cheney watching TV in his office (by clicking on the picture), you can see that the ABC News clock on the TV appears to be showing a time of 9:33 a.m.: https://www.flickr.com/photos/usnationalarchives/19921999311/in/album-72157656213196901/

And if you zoom in on this photo, the ABC News clock appears to be showing a time of 9:36 a.m.:

The most obvious evidence that Cheney could not have been in the PEOC by about 9:20 a.m., as Mineta claimed, is this photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/usnationalarchives/19916932565/in/album-72157656213196901/
This shows that Cheney was still in his office when President Bush appeared on TV giving his talk from the library at the Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida. This speech was given at 9:30 a.m. (see http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010911.html).

This evidence is consistent with what I wrote in my article, "The Dangerously Delayed Reactions of the Secret Service on 9/11," where I indicated that Cheney was most likely evacuated from his office after 9:35 a.m. You can read that article here:


Cheney's nonchalant attitude, chilling in the La-Z-Boy with feet on the desk, makes me wonder: Is this his much later review of an earlier live broadcast?

At 9:33 and 9:36 am the White House had already been warned of an unidentified aircraft headed towards the P-56 no-fly zone.

Shouldn't Dick be on the phone talking to somebody?

Shouldn't his office be swarming with minions asking what's to be done?

Photos show visitors to Cheney's office

The following photos show some of Cheney's colleagues visiting the vice president in his office after the second plane hit the World Trade Center, consistent with what is described in numerous accounts (but not that of Norman Mineta):

one of them was Irving Lewis

one of them was Irving Lewis „Scooter“ Libby!

I tend to lean that way... cautious about Norman Mineta's story

I am not saying Mineta deliberately lied. But every witness will have a perspective.

In addition, there is the "ability to remember previous events" which varies from person to person.
It is rare that an individual has an "exact photo-etched duplicate of events".
Example exercise: Try recalling the exact sequence/time stamp of last going to the grocery store and filling the basket with items in proper sequence, then checking out, then the amount paid. No real stress in grocery shopping - not like a terrorist attack.

Introduced confusions
One common denominator which I observe with government cover-ups is lots of confusion, (lots of data, lots of missing pieces, lots of conflicting renditions).
With that common denominator of "introduced confusions", is the Systemic Psychopathic Attitude of "We designed and own the system. You are sucked into playing our board game as a disposable commodity. We make the rules. And we can change the rules anytime. We don't care what you say."

Introduced confusions...
"There are many of those." -- Donald Rumsfeld on Meet the Press describing Bin Laden's many underground caves.

Perspectives of a PSYCHOPATH

These photos are mixed

These photos are mixed together wildly. There could be a reason why there are no time stamps on it.
So it is not possible to extract statements out of them like you do it, shoestring.

These photos were carefully

These photos were carefully selected to "prove" the account to the white house, for example by placing the photos of Cheney sitting on his desk in his office into the other photos in the bunker.

For the 911-commission it had been easy to debunk the account of Norman Mineta, for example by speaking to Minetas driver / security on 911, but he was just ignored. You cannot find the accounts of his driver / security in the 911-commission-interviews. Why?

Security? What security?

ALL entries and exits at the WH must be logged and video monitored.

Where are those records collected by the Secret Service? These would show conclusively what time Norman arrived.

Other evidence contradicts Norman Mineta's account

There is other evidence, besides these photos, which I think casts doubt upon Norman Mineta's claim that Dick Cheney was in the PEOC by around 9:20 a.m.

For example, former 9/11 Commission staff member Miles Kara made what I think is an important point, by summarizing what Mineta would have had to achieve if he made it to the PEOC by 9:20 a.m. as he has claimed. Kara wrote that on the morning of September 11: "Secretary Mineta was in his office on the top floor of the Department of Transportation building. He accomplished the following actions after UA 175 struck the South Tower [at 9:03 a.m.]. He assimilated what he saw and conversed with his staff. He took time to talk to CEO's of airlines. He descended to the ground floor and was driven to the White House West Wing gate, a minimum of eight minutes on a good day. He then passed through security and debarked at the West Wing where he met with Richard Clarke some time after the SVTS conference, which convened at 0940. ... Mineta had to then cross to the East Wing and descend to the PEOC." (Source)

It would therefore have been an extraordinary achievement if Mineta had reached the PEOC any time close to 9:20 a.m.

Also, Mineta has said that when he arrived at the White House, the place was being evacuated and people were "running away" or "running out" of there. (Source) But CNN's John King, who was outside the White House at the time, said that people only started running away from the White House, in response to the Secret Service's orders to evacuate, at around 9:45 a.m. Before then, people had been leaving the White House in a slow and orderly fashion. (Source) This indicates that Mineta arrived at the White House after 9:45 a.m. and could therefore not have been in the PEOC at 9:20 a.m.

Nelson Garabito

Nelson Garabito was in charge of the security of White House airspace. He was talking to his counterpart Terry Van Steenbergen at FAA HQ "within 30 seconds" of the UA175 crash into WTC2. @ mark 5:35

Terry tells us several times that Nelson was feeding information to him, but he has no idea where the information comes from***.

Nelson is aware of a plane headed to Washington at least 30 minutes out. That means he has access to very long range radar, as you would expect for the Secret Service charged with WH security.

The WH got a warning from Dulles ATCs well before impact time at ~9:38.

The fact is the WH ordered an evacuation early. Why? I say it was due to Nelson's awareness of unidentified aircraft headed to WDC, with a <30 minute window of closure. The hurried evac was surely due to the Dulles warning some minutes before 9:38.

So Mineta could have witnessed either evacuation, but it wouldn't take him more than a few minutes to get down to the EBR after arrival.

***NOTE: Very curious statements about being able to see AA77 on the TSD @ mark 14:10

Mayer Rothschild was lauded at same commencement where Cheney

was awarded an Honorary PhD for public service, by BYU Administrators.
Here is the link to this talk, given at the April 2007 BYU Commencement exercise:


Quoting in part:
"in the mid-eighteenth century, Mayer Amschel
Rothschild founded the House of Rothschild. This
creator of the Rothschild fortune had five sons, each
of whom he set up in the banking business in one of
the era’s five principal European financial capitals:
Frankfurt, Vienna, London, Paris, and Naples. He
lent them the money to get started at lower than
normal interest with the proviso that they pay him
back. He directed that each son keep the profits of
his individual bank once the original loan had been
repaid. He also charged interest in the form of intellectual
currency. He requested each of his sons relay
to him every bit of financial information he gained
in his city. He agreed to share this intellectual interest
with his other sons. In modern terms, he created
an effective information network."

" Mayer Amschel Rothschild also used a powerful
investment technique to manage the risk to his
family’s human capital. By sending each son to a
different city, he diversified his human assets into
five separate investments, thereby increasing the
probability that at least one of the branches would
survive political and economic risks. Ultimately,
only the London and Paris branches survived
and continue to prosper."
"Today, some 250 years
later, the name Rothschild is synonymous with
wealth. "