You are herecontent / Dick Cheney's Impeachable Offenses
Dick Cheney's Impeachable Offenses
The first three of the many charges below are taken from H Res 333
Cheney has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:
(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction:
(A) ‘‘We know they have biological and chemical weapons.’’ March 17, 2002, Press Conference by Vice President Dick Cheney and His Highness Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa, Crown Prince of Bahrain at Shaikh Hamad Palace.
(B) ‘‘...and we know they are pursuing nuclear weapons.’’ March 19, 2002, Press Briefing by Vice President Dick Cheney and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Jerusalem.
(C) ‘‘And he is actively pursuing nuclear weapons at this time...’’ March 24, 2002, CNN Late Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.
(D) ‘‘We know he’s got chemicals and biological and we know he’s working on nuclear.’’ May 19, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(E) ‘‘But we now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons... Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.’’ August 26, 2002, Speech 22 of Vice President Cheney at VFW 103rd National Convention.
(F) ‘‘Based on intelligence that’s becoming available, some of it has been made public, more of it hopefully will be, that he has indeed stepped up his capacity to produce and deliver biological weapons, that he has reconstituted his nuclear program to develop a nuclear weapon, that there are efforts under way inside Iraq to significantly expand his capability.’’ September 8, 2002 NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(G) ‘‘He is, in fact, actively and aggressively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.’’ September 8, 2002 NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(H) ‘‘And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.’’ March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.
(A) Vice President Cheney and his Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby, made multiple trips to the CIA in 2002 to question analysts studying Iraq’s weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration’s policy objectives accounts.
(B) Vice President Cheney sought out unverified and ultimately inaccurate raw intelligence to prove his preconceived beliefs. This strategy of cherry picking was employed to influence the interpretation of the intelligence.
(3) The Vice President’s actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002 and carefully considered by Congress prior to the October 10, 2002 vote to authorize the use of force. The Vice President’s actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intelligence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two Federal agencies.
(A) The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate stated ‘‘Lacking persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute it’s nuclear weapons program INR is unwilling to speculate that such an effort began soon after the departure of UN inspectors or to project a timeline for the completion of activities it does not now see happening. As a result INR is unable to predict that Iraq could acquire a nuclear device or weapon.’’
(B) The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate also stated that ‘‘Finally, the claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural uranium in Africa are, in INR’s assessment, highly dubious.’’
(C) The State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate references a Department of Energy opinion by stating that ‘‘INR accepts the judgment of technical experts at the US Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose.’’
H Res 333 does not mention, but it is also relevant, that post-invasion Cheney clung to the idea that Iraq had WMDs. The above also does not include much explanation of how we know that Cheney knew he was lying. Congressman Henry Waxman has posted a searchable database of lies. It includes Cheney WMD lies not included above (with citations) and Cheney lies about al Qaeda not included below, a total of 51 Cheney lies. And it explains how we know in each case that he was lying.
Further documentation would begin with this:
CHENEY (August 26, 2002): "But we now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. Among other sources, we've gotten this from the firsthand testimony of defectors -- including Saddam's own son-in-law, who was subsequently murdered at Saddam's direction...During the spring of 1995, the inspectors were actually on the verge of declaring that Saddam's programs to develop chemical weapons and longer-range ballistic missiles had been fully accounted for and shut down. Then Saddam's son-in-law suddenly defected and began sharing information...That should serve as a reminder to all that we often learned more as the result of defections than we learned from the inspection regime itself."
Here's Kamel on CNN on September 21, 1995:
CNN: Can you state, here and now, does Iraq have any weapons of mass destruction left?
KAMEL: No. Iraq does not possess any weapons of mass destruction.
In the notes from Kamel's 1995 debriefing by the UN, he's asked:
PROF. ZIFFERERO: were there any continuation of , or present nuclear activities, for example, EMIS, centrifuge?
And here's a declassified CIA document from their interrogation of Kamel:
SOURCE HAS STATED SPECIFICALLY THAT THE CENTRIFUGES HAVE BEEN DESTROYED, AND NONE ARE LEFT HIDDEN
Finally, we know someone at the White House was asking the CIA about Kamel at the beginning of 2002, because the WMD Commission refers to this document:
Senior Executive Memorandum (Jan. 12, 2002) (discussing the value of Kamil's information)
Senior Executive Memoranda are produced by the CIA in response to high-level questions from the executive branch. But what this specifically said is unknown, because the CIA has turned down FOIA requests for it from the National Security Archive.
Cheney purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:
(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda:
(A) ‘‘His regime has had high-level contacts with Al Qaeda going back a decade and has provided training to Al Qaeda terrorists.’’ December 2, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at the Air National Guard Senior Leadership Conference.
(B) ‘‘His regime aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda. He could decide secretly to provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists for use against us.’’ January 30, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to 30th Political Action Conference in Arlington, Virginia.
(C) ‘‘We know he’s out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know that he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the Al Qaeda organization.’’ March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(D) ‘‘We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on biological weapons and chemical weapons...’’ September 14, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(E) ‘‘Al Qaeda had a base of operation there up in Northeastern Iraq where they ran a large poisons factory for attacks against Europeans and U.S. forces.’’ October 3, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney at Bush-Cheney ’04 Fundraiser in Iowa.
(F) ‘‘He also had an established relationship with Al Qaeda providing training to Al Qaeda members in areas of poisons, gases, and conventional bombs.’’ October 10, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to the Heritage Foundation.
(G) ‘‘Al Qaeda and the Iraqi intelligence services have worked together on a number of occasions.’’ January 9, 2004, Rocky Mountain News interview with Vice President Cheney.
(H) ‘‘I think there’s overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government’’ January 22, 2004, NPR: Morning Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.
(I) ‘‘First of all, on the question of—of whether or not there was any kind of relationship, there clearly was a relationship. It’s been testified to; the evidence is overwhelming.’’ June 17, 2004, CNBC: Capital Report interview with Vice President Cheney.
(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no credible evidence existed of a working relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, a fact articulated in several official documents, including:
(A) A classified Presidential Daily Briefing ten days after the September 11, 2001 attacks indicating that the United States intelligence community had no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks and that there was ‘‘scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda’.’
(B) Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary No. 044-02, issued in February 2002 by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency, which challenged the credibility of information gleaned from captured al Qaeda leader al-Libi. The DIA report also cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein-al-Qaeda conspiracy: ‘‘Saddam’s regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.’’
(C) A January 2003 British intelligence classified report on Iraq that concluded that ‘‘there are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qaeda network’’
Cheney has maintained in televised statements right up through the spring of 2007 that Iraq and al Qaeda worked together.
Bill Moyers' recent program on the media's role in "Buying the War" has Bob Simon of 60 Minutes saying that when the White House claimed a 9-11 hijacker had met with a representative of the Iraqi government in Prague, 60 Minutes was easily able to make a few calls and find out that there was no evidence for the claim. "If we had combed Prague," he says, "and found out that there was absolutely no evidence for a meeting between Mohammad Atta and the Iraqi intelligence figure. If we knew that, you had to figure the administration knew it. And yet they were selling the connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam."
Cheney has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:
(1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:
(A) ‘‘For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the irresponsible conduct of the regime. And we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.’’ March 7, 2006, Speech of Vice President Cheney to American Israel Public Affairs Committee 2006 Policy Conference.
(B) ‘‘But we’ve also made it clear that all options are on the table.’’ January 24, 2007, CNN Situation Room interview with Vice President Cheney.
(C) ‘‘When we—as the President did, for example, recently—deploy another aircraft carrier task force to the Gulf, that sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat.’’ January 29, 2007, Newsweek interview with Vice President Cheney.
(D) ‘‘But I’ve also made the point and the President has made the point that all options are still on the table.’’ February 24, 2007, Vice President Cheney at Press Briefing with Australian Prime Minister in Sydney, Australia.
(2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States as evidenced by the following:
(A) ‘‘I know that what we see in Iran right now is not the industrial capacity you can [use to develop a] bomb.’’ Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.
(B) Iran indicated its ‘‘full readiness and willingness to negotiate on the modality for the resolution of the outstanding issues with the IAEA, subject to the assurances for dealing with the issues in the framework of the Agency, without the interference of the United Nations Security Council’’. IAEA Board Report, Feb- 4
ruary 22, 2007.
(C) ‘‘...so whatever they have, what we have seen today, is not the kind of capacity that would enable them to make bombs.’’ Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.
(3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following:
(A) The United States has refused to engage in meaningful diplomatic relations with Iran since 2002, rebuffing both bilateral and multilateral offers to dialogue.
(B) The United States is currently engaged in a military buildup in the Middle East that includes the increased presence of the United States Navy in the waters near Iran, significant United States Armed Forces in two nations neighboring to Iran, and the installation of anti-missile technology in the region.
(C) News accounts have indicated that military planners have considered the B61-11, a tactical nuclear weapon, as one of the options to strike underground bunkers in Iran.
(D) The United States has been linked to anti-Iranian organizations that are attempting to destabilize the Iranian government, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), even though the state department has branded it a terrorist organization.
(E) News accounts indicate that United States troops have been ordered into Iran to collect data and establish contact with anti-government groups.
(4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran. However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S Constitution’s adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force.
(A) Article VI of the United States Constitution states, ‘‘This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.’’ Any provision of an international treaty ratified by the United States becomes the law of the United States.
(B) The United States is a signatory to the United Nations Charter, a treaty among the nations of the world. Article II, Section 4 of the United Nations Charter states, ‘‘All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.’’ The threat of force is illegal.
(C) Article 51 lays out the only exception, ‘‘Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.’’ Iran has not attacked the United States; therefore any threat against Iran by the United States is illegal.
The Vice President’s deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President’s recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counter-productive to the national security of the United States.
There are more recent clips not cited here, including on an aircraft carrier in the Gulf.
Bridge to a 22nd Century:
Additional Charges Not Contained in H Res 333
Cheney led a campaign of retribution against whistleblower Joseph Wilson, including the outing of a covert CIA operative.
The trial of Scooter Libby has produced overwhelming evidence that Vice President Cheney personally led the campaign to attack Joe Wilson through the media. This "get Wilson" campaign included telling numerous reporters that Wilson was sent to Niger by his wife Valerie Plame, a CIA operative. Cheney was told by the CIA that Valerie Plame worked as a covert agent in the CIA's Nonproliferation Division, which is the critical division of the CIA responsible for stopping the spread of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. Cheney's efforts to expose Plame actually exposed her entire covert network, at tremendous cost to the CIA's secret war against terrorism. If Plame's work had been exposed by a double-agent in our government like Aldrich Ames or Robert Hanssen, that person would face prosecution for espionage and treason. The evidence of Cheney's role is more than enough to start an impeachment investigation.
* Just Another Obstruction of Justice
* The Two Redacted Pages
* Indictment of Cheney for Plame Leak
* Fitzgerald Again Points to Cheney
* Fitzgerald: "There Is a Cloud Over the Vice President"
* Libby Testimony Raises More Questions about Cheney's Role In The CIA Leak Case
* Libby Trial Sheds Light on White House
* Did Bush and Cheney Lie to Fitzgerald?
* Libby Told Grand Jury He Was Ordered to Leak Intelligence
* Court Hears Libby Describe Cheney as 'Upset' at Critic
* Libby Trial: Russert Ruins the Cover Story
* Addington Points to Cheney
* Cheney's Notes
Ambassador Joe Wilson, Congressional testimony July 11, 2007: Cheney initiated and directed Libby's wrongdoing.
Cheney led efforts to torture.
Cheney played a key role in setting up illegal spying programs.
* NY Times: "Dick Cheney sent Mr. Gonzales and another official to Mr. Ashcroft’s hospital room to get him to approve the wiretapping."
* Unimpeachably Impeachable
* Cheney Urged Illegal Wiretaps
* Ashcroft's ex-no. 2 says Gonzales, Cheney tried to take advantage of sick Attorney General.
* Cheney Wants Surveilliance Law Expanded.
Cheney has refused to comply with a subpoena from the Senate Judiciary Committee: http://www.democrats.com/subpoenas
Did Cheney send Gonzales to Ashcroft's hospital bed in an aggressive attempt to legalize a criminal spying program? He "doesn't recall."
Cheney led manipulation of pre-war intelligence.
The Scooter Libby trial also exposed the lead role of Vice President Cheney's office in manipulating pre-war intelligence to defraud Congress into authorizing the invasion of Iraq. Sworn testimony revealed that Cheney's office managed the evidence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, all of which proved to be lies. Cheney personally visited the CIA several times before the invasion to pressure the CIA to distort pre-war intelligence. And Cheney exerted "constant" pressure on the Republican former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee to stall an investigation into the Bush administration's use of flawed intelligence on Iraq, according to the new chairman, Senator Jay Rockefeller.
On July 14, 2003, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity laid out the case for asking Bush to request Cheney's resignation: PDF.
Cheney created the secret Energy Task Force which operated in defiance of open-government laws.
Cheney's lawyer, David Addington, advocated the "Unitary Executive Theory" which is used by the White House to defy laws duly enacted by Congress and thereby justify dictatorial action.
Cheney directed massive no-bid contracts to his company, Halliburton, and profitted from the same illegal war he defrauded the American public to launch.
Cheney increased the danger of climate change.
Cheney Suppressed Evidence in California Energy Crisis
Cheney has been manipulating and misleading about evidence of Iranian nuclear weapons and other justifications for an attack on Iran.
Cheney has refused to comply with a subpoena.
More Reading Materials
* Cheney Country
* Dick Cheney Really Is That Bad
* Answering to No One
* Cheney's Long-Lost Twin
* Cheney Made Bush Commute Libby
* Why the Perjury?
* Lost Liberties
* Absolute Power Corrupts...Cheney
* Doak: Restore Constitution as law of the land - Impeach Cheney
* Nation needs intervention to get Cheney out of office
* Did Dick Cheney kill 70,000 salmon? Committee to probe
* Rep. McDermott: The Vice President Should Resign or Face Impeachment
* Dick Cheney's Dangerous Influence
* The Misunderestimated Mr. Cheney: The Vice President's Record of Willfully Violating the Law, And Wrongly Claiming Authority
* Impeach Cheney: The vice president has run utterly amok and must be stopped: By Bruce Fein
* Dick Cheney's Dangerous Son-In-Law
* Subpoena Dick
* The People vs. Richard Cheney
* Dick Cheney Rules
* Dick Cheney and Jim Wright Saved Reagan: What Can Cheney and Nancy Pelosi Do for Bush?
* The Spoiler: How Cheney ensures diplomatic failure with Iran
* Cheney's New Front in War on Reality
* Cheney Hints at Iran Strike
* Stink of Blood Money
* Cheney's the One
* Cheney Promises to Veto Employee Free Choice Act
* Impeach the Two of Them
* Dick Cheney and the Dog that Didn't Bark
* Mr. Cheney, Tear Down This Wall
* ISOO Asks Attorney General to Rule on Cheney's Role
* Impeach Cheney Part 1.
* Impeach Cheney Part 2.
* Impeach Cheney Part 3.
* Cheney Pursuing Nuclear Ambitions of His Own.
* Cheney Tried to Stifle Dissent in Iran NIE
* Cheney's Own Logic for Impeachment
* Challenging Cheney
Congress is on politically safe, as well as morally necessary, ground impeaching Dick Cheney.
George Bush's approval ratings are among the lowest ever recorded by a President, and Cheney's are much lower.
If we impeach Cheney first, no one need fear a President Cheney.
A lot of people are understandably, if misguidedly, afraid that impeaching George W. Bush would somehow make Cheney president. Because Cheney is already running the White House, this change would not be as serious as people fear. But we can impeach Cheney FIRST and make all the fears go away.
This is about far more than selecting the next president.
It would benefit political opponents of the Bush-Cheney agenda for Cheney to be President, as he would shatter Truman's record for unpopularity and help boost a Democratic landslide in 2008. The Republicans know this and will never allow Cheney to be president. He'll resign before Bush is removed from office, and we'll have a new Gerald Ford (a President Pelosi is no more likely than a President Cheney). We'll have the same result if we impeach Cheney first and remove him from office. And we may get there faster this way.
Removal from office follows impeachment, which follows an investigation. A serious investigation of either Cheney or Bush will inevitably incriminate the other. In fact, the Libby trial has already shown this. Such an investigation would benefit our democracy whether or not it finally arrived at impeachment, and impeachment of both Bush and Cheney is richly merited, as is removal from office. But removal from office is an additional and difficult step. Merely impeaching Bush leaves us with President... Bush. Whichever of these two we impeach first, it is possible we will impeach them both before removing either from office.
We must impeach Cheney and Bush to establish standards for all future presidents, not to pick one. And ultimately we must stop fearing possible results of this in order to see it through. A President Cheney afraid of being held accountable by us is far preferable to a President Bush taking orders from a Vice President Cheney who believes he's above the law.
Impeachment is not a way to pick a president, and if all you're worried about is picking a president, you have no business monkeying around with something as profoundly significant as impeachment. Impeachment is a tool for removing a criminal president from office, thus establishing limitations on power for subsequent presidents. If we do not impeach Cheney and Bush, we will have established that it is acceptable for presidents to lie us into wars, to spy without warrants, to detain without charge, to torture, to reverse laws with signing statements, etc. These reasons go to the survival of our democracy, a matter of far greater significance than the person who next sits in the office of the presidency – or the office of the king if that is what it is to become.
It is not politically dangerous to impeach. It is politically dangerous not to impeach when the case is clear. The Democrats calculated that by letting the Iran-Contra gang off the hook, they could win the next elections. They then lost those elections. The Republicans tried to impeach Truman, won what they wanted from the Supreme Court, and then won the next elections. A dozen examples through history tell the same story. The only near-exception is Clinton. But that was an impeachment the public opposed. So, it ought to have had a reverse result from the other cases. Even so, the Republicans lost fewer seats than is the norm at that point in a majority tenure, and they lost seats mostly in the Senate which acquitted, not the House which impeached. The handful of fanatical Congress Members who imposed the Clinton impeachment on the rest of the Congress and the country won big in their next elections. Would that we had a few fanatics for serious justice in the House today.
Listen to the song: Impeach Cheney First.
Cheney's 10 Commandments: Animation
Cheney Caught Being Honest in 1994:
Dick Cheney's Jury: