You are hereBlogs / davidswanson's blog / The Case for Prosecuting Bush

The Case for Prosecuting Bush


By davidswanson - Posted on 05 February 2011

The 35 Articles of Impeachment and the Case for Prosecuting George W. Bush
From Feral House

Congressman Dennis Kucinich With Additional Material by David Swanson and Elizabeth de la Vega

trade paperback edition • 156 pages • 5.5 x 8.5 • ISBN: 978-1-932595-42-0 • $12

$12.00

Feral House offers this important and urgent publication of Dennis Kucinich’s Articles of Impeachment in two formats: an offset-printed paperback book available for the cost of $12 and a free downloadable PDF available below.

David Swanson’s additional article explains how the Impeachment process is possible and necessary even after the guilty perp leaves office, and how they can be used for prosecution of crimes. Those wishing to purchase over ten copies of the printed book can obtain them at discount from Feral House directly. Please contact info@feralhouse.com for costs.

"More than two centuries ago, the Founders of this country set forth a procedure for Congress to follow in the event of grave abuse of power by the Chief Executive. That process is impeachment. In the face of the monumental deceit and disregard for the Constitution that we have witnessed on the part of the President over the past seven years, Congressman Kucinich’s initiation of this process is neither fanciful nor futile, neither vengeful nor vindictive; it is the sober fulfillment of his sworn duty as a Congressman to follow the law without regard to personal consequence and misguided political stratagem. It is, quite simply, an act of patriotism."
—Elizabeth de la Vega, Former Federal Prosecutor and author of United States v. George W. Bush et. al.

"This collection of impeachable offenses should be viewed as a sampling of the crimes and abuses of President George W. Bush and his subordinates. Bush has had many accomplices — first and foremost Vice President Cheney. But our Founders created a single executive precisely so that we could hold that one person accountable for the actions of the executive branch. It is high time we did so, and millions of Americans will be urging their representatives to support the effort being led by Congressman Kucinich.  These articles establish, and hearings would establish further, that President Bush was ‘the decider’ behind countless abuses of power. And, of course, his public comments have time and again advertised his indifference to the laws he is violating. Not only does overwhelming evidence show us that Bush knew his claims about WMDs to be false, but the president has shown us that he considers the question of truth or falsehood to be laughably irrelevant. When Diane Sawyer asked Bush why he had claimed with such certainty that there were so many weapons in Iraq, he replied: 'What’s the difference? The possibility that [Saddam] could acquire weapons, If he were to acquire weapons, he would be the danger.' What’s the difference? Hundreds of thousands of corpses and a fatal blow to the rule of law among nations. That’s the difference. Unless we remove impeachment from the Constitution by failing to exercise it, in which case truth will no longer matter any more than justice or peace."
— David Swanson, creator of ImpeachCheney.org, Washington Director  of Democrats.com and co-founder of the AfterDowningStreet.org.

"Overload is the main problem—I call it outrage fatigue. The sheer multitude, not to mention magnitude, of impeachable offenses tends to dull the senses. The opportunity to dig into just one or two provided some space and focused the mind. At the same time, the deeper one digs, the more unimaginable the dirt that comes up. Earlier, I had not taken the time to sift through the abundant evidence of the unconscionable ways in which George Bush and George Tenet teamed up—including, in Tenet’s case, lying under oath—to stave off charges of misfeasance/ malfeasance before the attacks on 9/11. The Founders pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to create a system in which we could protect ourselves from unbridled power. Today, we cannot let a 21st Century string of abuses and usurpations stand without challenge. But the experience of the past several years shows that there is a very high hurdle in our way: no Common Sense. I refer, of course, to the courageous independent journalism of the likes of Tom Paine who stirred the innate dignity of Americans toward sacrifice for independence and freedom. Tom Paine would be horrified to see what has become of his profession today—with browbeaten journalists and former general officers doing the bidding of the corporations that own/pay them.In my view, impeachment proceedings are essential to:

  • Reestablish the separation of powers in our Constitution as a check on the so-called unitary executive
  • Prevent a budding—and catastrophic—US attack on Iran by exposing it as yet another war of aggression against a country posing no threat to the US;
  • Call attention to the blood already drained from our civil liberties and staunch the bleeding.

"Impeachment proceedings may be the only way to force the captive media to inform normal citizens about what has been going on in our country. Thomas Jefferson underscored the importance of this when he said: 'Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government.'”
Ray McGovern; former Army officer and CIA analyst; co-founder, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

"President Bush, Cheney and other US officials have violated numerous domestic and international laws governing crime of aggression, war crime, torture, etc., and they should be not only impeached by the US Congress but also be prosecuted by a special prosecutor, to the full extent of the law before or after impeachment. That is the best way to uphold the US Constitution and the rule of law at home and abroad."
John Kim, Esq., Attorney; author of The Crime of Aggression Against Iraq

"The breadth of impeachable offenses committed by the Bush/Cheney administration is likely unparalleled in our nation’s history. Equally unparalleled, and in many cases even more alarming and outrageous, is the lack of accountability brought to the perpetrators of these High Crimes and Misdemeanors. It is the Constitutional duty of members of Congress—members from any political party—to bring such accountability, particularly when the list of crimes began with the very acts that brought this administration into office during their elections, and right up through today when the same sort of crimes continue, and are in place to try and affect our next Presidential Election. This is not about politics, it’s about the Constitutional duty of Congress. If a line in the sand is not drawn immediately and clearly in the face of such corruption and disdain for our American values, such as the Rule of Law, the historical bar for criminality in our Executive Branch will have been forever lowered, no matter who happens to serve in the White House in the future."
Brad Friedman, creator/ editor of The Brad Blog, and co-founder  of the watchdog organization VelvetRevolution.us.

“I have provided the legal architecture and evidence for a trial to prosecute the President for murder. My book lends credence to a powerful case for impeachment laid out persuasively by Congressman Dennis Kucinich’s 35 Articles of Impeachment.”
— Vincent Bugliosi, Former District Attorney, author of  The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder


Download the entire book free!

These articles establish, and hearings would establish further, that President Bush was ‘the decider’ behind countless abuses of power.

Yes and no. He officially was "the decider", because he officially, though unconstitutionally, was President and, therefore, C-in-C of the military forces. It was unconstitutional, because he was not [elected]; he was appointed by a small panel of corrupt "justices" of the so-called Supreme Court. So he bullshitedly-officially wore the title of President and C-in-C, BUT there's a catch. He did not run the White House. He was not a real President. He did not decide what the White House would and would not do. Other people did, and he should be indicted for his complicity, but not only he should be indicted and impeached.

Dennis Kucinich didn't make that mistake. His bills called for impeachment of both of these criminals, Bush and Cheney; not only Bush.

9/11: Bush was amusingly visiting an elementary school classroom. Why? What US President makes the decision to do this, to get read "My Pet Goat" with a classroom of elementary school pupils, at any time, ever? Bush didn't make this design decision. PR people did, or people did for PR purposes anyway. Cheney, Mr "CoG", Continuity of Government, surely had much to do with making this PR decision and others evidently would have gone along with this. Was it Cheney who first made the decision? Was he only following a suggestion, or direction, from other elites? We certainly don't know the answer to that question. But we have enough evidence, even if only strongly circumstantial in nature, to be able to understand or realize that Bush most surely is not the person who was responsible for deciding that he was going to go to Florida for any reason at all, much less for reading or pretending to read "My Pet Goat" with a classroom of elementary school students. Intellectually, however, the book may've been very fitting. Otoh, goats can kick butt and Bush is a political bozo, marionette; one prone to being the wrong, a criminal kind, but still a marionnette. Many people called Karl Rove(r) "Bush's brain" and this wasn't baseless.

And when we listen to then to the testimony of then NTA head, Norman Minetta, about some of Cheney's doings that morning, then we get to see Mr Cheney CoG in action; very striking action. And that was not the only example that he provided as being highly in charge of White House doings. There's a video at Youtube, if the clip hasn't been removed anyway, and it is Bush speaking before some audience, speaking to a public audience that was present. The title for the page at Youtube includes the words "Bush" and "slip" or "slip-up" or "slip up". He was talking about the war on Iraq and said that of course humanity would be much better off if the US withdrew from Iraq; quite interesting words. They were inarguably true. But of the few times that Bush spoke in softening terms about the war on Iraq, Cheney always rushed, stormed forward enforcing the plan to maintain course.

Indict Bush, but not only him, and I'd say to especially go after Cheney and Rumsfeld; yet Condo. Rice and Colin Powell inarguably are war criminals of very serious sort and they should also be indicted. Colin Powell has made some somewhat respectable first choices, but always folds back into the mafia way of Washington politics. He knows it and does it, repeatedly, so he should not be ignored; and Condo. Rice was also very criminal. They should all be indicted.

Of course if that's done, then Clinton should also be indicted and prosecuted, and since GHW Bush is still alive, he also should be indicted and prosecuted. And the prosecutions of all of these people should result in long prison sentences for all of them. It might not be all that long for GHW Bush, given his age, but there's no valid reason for him to be allowed to continue to be a "free man".

If there's prosecution against Bush, Cheney, et cetera, then the Repub. Party would surely oppose this; but if the same is done to Dem. Party war criminals, then maybe Repub. Party opposition would be less acute, say. Both parties, criminal as they are, would oppose and they'd probably unite together against these prosecutions, helping to protect each other. But if no efforts are made for justice, then we're guaranteed to get none, no justice. Trying may prove to be very fruitless, because the US can continue its global crimes against humanity even if some former political officials, CIA officers or agents, et cetera, can no longer safely travel to some countries. But if people are for justice, then trying to obtain it is necessary.

When speaking of only the Bush Jr administration, however, then Cheney and Rumsfeld need to both be included in impeachments, indictments, prosecutions, and sentencing.

Dennis Kucinich did not neglect Cheney. His impeachment call was for both Bush and Cheney, and that's the way it needed to be. If Bush had been impeached, but not Cheney, then this would have been bad. Many activists called only for Bush impeachment and this was to be half blind.

I believe Norman Minetta's testimony, which he gave to the 9/11 Commission, but which the puppet jerk the Bush-Cheney administration put in charge of the drafting of the final report of the commission made sure to exclude, as well as excluding what I have read to be important and revealing testimony of (I believe) Richard Clark or Clarke, well, these testimonies are very important and Norman Minetta's is specifically about something Cheney did the morning of 9/11. It's extremely incriminating for Cheney. It basically describes that he really, literally was complicit in the attack on the Pentagon and if that's true, then he may've been complicit in the rest.

Words from retired Lt. Col. Robert M. Bowman and Ray McGovern, in interviews that they gave about their thoughts on 9/11 are complementary to Norman Minetta's testimony. They both said that the Pentagon is a [heavily] defended location, it has very serious defense systems, including against aerial attacks; but as everyone can easily know, none of these defense systems operated. That is more than only complementary information for what Norman Minetta said. It's specifically related. Cheney ordered defense stand-down. The only question is whether this was about standing down military interceptor jets or the anti-aerial attack missile system(s) the Pentagon is very equipped with. When AA 77 was 30 miles out, maybe the stand-down order was about both defenses, but the control operator asked again with 77 was 20 miles out and then again when it was 10 miles out, at which point it evidently would've been too late for interceptor jets, but not too late for missile defense. Iow, Cheney made sure that the hit on the Pentagon happened.

I don't think Norman Minetta lied in his testimony. He was not fabricating this story, and Robert Bowman and Ray McGovern also did not lie. These videos are all online; it's only up to people to listen to these. Listen or don't, but people who don't then have nothing to say about what these video clips tell us.

Bush is guilty, because he was appointed President and C-in-C, and he went along with commanding the crimes of (officially) his administration; but Cheney's always been the more dangerous and criminal character. Never forget Cheney; and for that matter, also never forget Rumsfeld. They're a pair and there's a lot of history to this duo. Bush is guilty, but he did not run the White House. He's a former cocaine addict, a heavy-user one, and boozer, and he's never been able to manage a relatively modest business. I don't think he's as responsible as Cheney and Rumsfeld are for the crimes of (officially) Bush's administration.

Go after the figurehead, the guy in the front, only, and you can miss the most criminal elements. Appearances are deceiving. Bill Clinton is a very serious, as well as extreme criminal, but he obeyed orders, directives. He's more savvy, say, than Bush Jr is, but Clinton was no real President. He worked for much more powerful elites and until these elites are indicted, et cetera, we're bound to get repeats of Washington criminality. Going after and nailing one or two of their Washington marionettes may provide some public satisfaction, but it won't stop the more powerful elites corrupting and controlling Washington.

The Dem. Party has a greater war-criminal history in the 20th century than the Repub. Party does and these Dem. Party supporters only bitch when it's the Repub. Party that's in power and committing crimes against humanity. When it's their blindly prefered party committing the crimes, then these faux activists disappear, become widely silent; they're evidently satisfied when they're the ones comitting the crimes for Corporate America. They don't like being displaced from the political or public scene. Ego; "it's either us, or nobody; we'll oppose all others trying to "best" us. If we're not bad enough, then we'll become worse".

And war on Iraq was planned before Bush was appointed president in 2000. Planning for this started earlier, and the war on Afghanistan was planned prior to 9/11. We can even consider the words of Jimmy Carter when he was President and basically stated that the US was to be the dominant power over the Middle East's energy resources; and we can consider earlier than that. We can consider US actions against the Iranian leader in 1953 and the Iraqi leader preceding Saddam Hussein, so in the 1960s.

There's a whole lotta history behind these wars and going after only Bush surely can't succeed. Repub. Party would surely fight against this, because he was a Repub. Party president. Dem. Party surely would not push, because the Repub. Party could then demand indictments and impeachments for Clinton and other Dem. Party presidents. If we can impeach Bush today as past president, then I don't see any reason for why Clinton, Carter and Johnson, f.e., could not be impeached, as well; besides LBJ being dead, today, anyway.

Obama would need to be immediately impeached the moment that Bush is impeached. There has [never] been a justifiable reason for the Obama administration continuing Bush administration policies; NEVER. And if Obama really is a scholar in Constitutional law, then he is aware of his criminality and treason; but one thing is certain and it is that he knows damn well that he lied during his 2008 presidential campaigns. He then knew that he really did not intend to live up to his promises of ending either war, on Iraq or Afghanistan. There is no way that, university-graduated as he is, he did not know that he was blatantly lying. He's a war criminal as much as Bush is, but Obama certainly seems to have greater intellect than Bush and this is bad for Obama, for it'd mean that he's even more criminal than marionnette Bush was. Both are marionettes on powerful people's payrolls, being paid one way or another, but certainly rewarded, financially. Look at schmuck Clinton who goes around and presents lectures or talks for plenty of money, f.e.; but that's publicly known payoff. There surely is more.

"War is a RACKET". Not even GHW Bush runs this racket alone. No one does. It's an oligarchy. Go after their political marionettes and we'll achieve something, but Americans will vote in, elect more marionettes; not Senator Paul Wellstone(s).

I think it's a Senator Webb who presented some sort of opposition about the war on Iraq, which his son was serving in. VP Cheney told the Senator to "fuck off" or go fuck himself, something like that, and Americans stayed SILENT! Bush Jr was not as war criminal and monger as Cheney was, and was not as much in charge of the White House as Cheney was. Bush Jr was (and is) an idiot. Cheney was (and is) a very serious and cunning (for people who are fooled by him anyway) criminal. Between the two, Cheney is the more dangerous. Bush, if he was guided by people of real ethics, morality, would surely be able to comply as much as he did with criminal directives. Cheney, however, he's a totally different individual. He's calculating. He's arrogant and has made this obvious enough a number of times to merit immediate impeachment, but sheeple Americans don't like to pay much attention to details; prefering "sound bites".

Impeach Bush, but don't forget Cheney, and Rumsfeld. Compared to these two criminals, Bush is sort of like mentally retarded. He sure grew up in a family that could drive a person into becoming mentally retarded anyway. The Bushes are all mentally retarded, but most people clinically considered retarded are innocent, so there's a "bit" of a difference, usually.

Support WarIsACrime



Donate.








Tweet your Congress critters here.


Advertise on this site!




Facebook      Twitter





Our Store:



















Movie Memorabilia.



The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.