You are hereImpeachment
A useful reminder:
Impeach if You Care About Obama, You Have Been Warned
By Ralph Lopez
Democrats Need to Advocate for Impeachment Proceedings in the House, Before Bush/Cheney Leave Office
Democrats need to advocate for impeachment proceedings in the House, before Bush/Cheney leave office
By Karen Rubin
Countless editorials and op-ed pieces have described the flurry of activity in the Bush Administration to cement into law and entangle the incoming Obama Administration with regulations that continues the pattern of pro-Corporation, anti-environment, anti-civil rights rule-making that the electorate effectively rejected in 2006 and 2008.
That is why even in these waning days of the Bush/Cheney Administration, to save the Republic, the House must act to impeach Bush & Cheney now, even in these final days, even in what is called the lame duck presidency.
In the first place, even as a lame duck, Bush is still abusing his powers by signing regulations that will entangle the next Administration, effectively canceling out the will of the people as expressed in this tidal wave election.
Jonathan Turley: "The Dems Will Repair Bush's Legacy...It's an Indictment of All of Us"
"Waterboarding is torture." Starts at about 1:10
For economy's sake, Pelosi needs to push for impeachment now
BY Rochelle Riley | Freep.com
Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s ineffectiveness became clear the day she became Speaker of the House and immediately announced that there would be no impeachment proceedings against President George W. Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney.
Guided by politics, she said leading investigations into just how much the Bush administration did – and did wrong – would be divisive. What she didn’t express was her worry that too many Democrats faced elimination from the House if they took on the difficult task of proving who knew what, when.
About the time that President George W. Bush started serving his second term, a number of books were published calling for his impeachment. Some grassroots citizens groups also emerged at that time with a similar goal. In 2005, Congressman John Conyers held an unauthorized hearing in the basement of the Capitol to look into the matter.
Will that be the headline on January 19th, 2009? Before he leaves office, will President Bush use his pardoning power to save the members of his administration from legal action?
Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution gives the president “Power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.” A pardon removes both punishment and guilt.
Sent in by Hollis Martin
November 21, 2008
Thank you for contacting me and sharing your thoughts about the impeachment of President Bush and Vice-President Cheney. I share the outrage that so many Vermonters have expressed over the disastrous policies of this president and his administration. While I believe that impeachment is not the appropriate remedy, I share the goal of restoring accountability to our government.
In the 110th Congress, our oversight investigations, among other actions, have exposed the egregiously substandard care for recovering soldiers at Walter Reed, documented unacceptable accounts of political interference by the Bush Administration over sound global warming science, and uncovered waste, fraud, and abuse associated with the war in Iraq on an unimaginable scale.
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts on impeachment. Although we may disagree on this issue, I hope that you will continue to be in touch on matters important to you.
Member of Congress
A Note to All the Misinformed People Who Keep Telling Me You Can't Impeach Someone After They're Out of Office
By David Swanson
Before anybody else Emails me their wise pseudo-informed decrees that nobody can be impeached after they are out of office, please read this 68-page report (PDF) which answers every objection I've ever heard.
My favorite highlights relate to Blount and Belknap. In 1797 the Senate tried Senator William Blount in an impeachment trial despite having already expelled him. He was not convicted, but the reason for not convicting him was not that he was out of office. In 1876 the House impeached and the Senate tried Secretary of War William Worth Belknap, who had resigned prior to the impeachment. The Senate ruled by a vote of 37-29 that it had jurisdiction despite the resignation. Belknap was acquitted, but not because he was not in office.
Witch-hunt To Persecute Warriors on Terror - Lawfare Against America
Forget bipartisanship. Forget the ability to protect our citizens from terrorists.
Some activists have revenge in mind...unprecedented attacks on former officials and citizens who assisted the government.
They plan to create a whole new legal minefield which can be used to hound anyone whom they dislike. Even if you think that Bush or someone should be prosecuted (which I find absurd), the tactics of these people should bring universal condemnation.
Some of these tactics can be easily used to effectively suppress dissent or otherwise leverage the personal power of activists in government positions to injure those with whom they disagree.
This effort is a neo-fascist attack on the rule of law and on our nation.
"...when Barack Obama moves into the Oval Office. Indeed, the über-popular president-elect will inherit an executive branch that has seen unprecedented increases in power over the past eight years, and, in reality, for many decades. It'll be up to the people to hold Obama accountable to his promises of increased transparency and respect for our nation's founding documents."
"Thank you for contacting me to inquire about starting impeachment proceedings for President Bush. As your representative in Congress, I appreciate hearing from you, and I welcome the opportunity to respond. I believe that trying to impeach the President with less than two months left in his term will divert us from dealing with the critical issues facing the nation....
CAROLYN B. MALONEY
Member of Congress"
It is not too late to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for violating the fourth, sixth and eighth amendments to the Constitution, for lying repeatedly about reasons to invade Iraq, for failing to prevent the downfall of our economy, for coercing intelligence information to be fixed around policy, for treason in exposing the identity of important covert intelligence operatives, for illegally violating subpoenas, for failing to provide sufficiently for our forces in battle, and for the indiscriminate abuse of signing statements to avoid obeying laws passed by Congress. It’s not too late. In fact, it’s essential to impeach before Jan. 20.
In The Public Interest: Restoring the Constitution
by Ralph Nader | In the Public Interest
Barack Obama is receiving lots of advice from many people these days about the collapse of Wall Street, the sinking economy and the quagmire wars he will inherit from the Bush regime. However, there is one important matter that he alone can address with his legal training and the sworn oath he will take on January 20 to uphold the Constitution. That phenomenon is the systemic, chronic lawlessness and criminality of the Bush/Cheney regime which he must unravel and stop.
To handle this immense responsibility as President, he needs to bring together a volunteer task force of very knowledgeable persons plus wise, retired civil servants to inventory the outlaw workings of this rogue regime.
Much is already known and documented officially and by academic studies and media reporting. In the category of "high crimes and misdemeanors", are (1) the criminal war/occupation of Iraq, (2) systemic torture as a White House policy, (3) arrests of thousands of Americans without charges or habeas corpus rights, (4) spying on large numbers of Americans without judicial warrants and (5) hundreds of signing statements by George W. Bush declaring that, he of the unitary presidency, will decide whether to obey the enacted bills or not.
To its everlasting credit, the conservative American Bar Association sent to President Bush three reports in 2005-2006 concluding that he has been engaged in continuing serious violations of the Constitution. This is no one-time Watergate obstruction of justice episode ala Nixon that led to his resignation just before his impeachment in the House of Representatives.
Impeachment Prevents Pardons
by Bennet D. Zurofsky, Esq.
Let's not forget that each act of illegal surveillance was a felony under the provisions of FISA in effect at the time. Hopefully, whistleblowers will open up about much more than illegal electronic surveillance after January 20, but we should be demanding that the new Attorney General appoint a prosecutor to convene a grand jury to investigate not only the criminal FISA violations but also the numerous other crimes of Bush, Cheney and their underlings and henchmen, especially including their war crimes.
While speaking on the topic of impeachment Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) promised that after the November 4 elections, he would pursue legal actions against the Bush administration. Conyers is in a unique position to initiate impeachment. As the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee (the body which would be responsible for initiating impeachment), he has been the sole obstacle to impeachment occurring ever since he and Nancy Pelosi (D-CA, Speaker of the House) took Impeachment "off the table."
If you think John Conyers might possibly be persuaded to keep his word (or you're a fan of smooth liars), check this out.
These jokesters could hardly contain themselves BUT it was not funny at all.
Bush could hardly contain himself, Lieberman couldn't stop laughing, and Pelosi (at .48 seconds) chuckled thinking it was so funny our brave soldiers didn't find the WMD in Iraq, Click Here.
All of the "politically pragmatic" excuses for NOT Impeaching George and the boys are now....off the table! There is now no excuse for excusing their crimes.
As always when there has been some sort of trauma...and we have had eight years of so much trauma that we are all suffering a sort of PTSD, I think, there is the urge, the instinct to ...move on, to not dwell on the trauma. To put it behind us as fast as possible. But if we are to get over the PTSD, well...
A poster on DU claims Conyers said yesterday he plans to enforce outstanding subpoenas in the coming year. I can't find any evidence of that. Can anyone? But I did find this:
According to the Detroit Free Press:
"A hoarse Congressman John Conyers spoke during the Democratic celebration at the Renaissance Center Marriott Hotel Tuesday night about 'retroactively impeaching one or two people in the White House.' Conyers called for 'informal hearings on the subject.'"
Yawn. Been there, done that, didn't fall for it the first dozen times. There's nothing informal about impeachment.
According to the Wall Street Journal:
Vermonters Could Be the Lynchpin for Impeaching Bush-Cheney; Charlotte Dennett Pledges Bugliosi as Special Prosecutor
The measure of a person's greatness and success lies not in the office to which that person is elected but in the person's ability to be true to the electorate once in office.
Anyone can sell their soul to buy a presidency or a dictatorship. It takes real power and courage to stand up to the forces that control most members of government. It takes true greatness to stand with the people against power-buyers.
SOMEONE on this site: For some people the sexual indiscretions of Bill Clinton are tougher to forgive than anything Bush has done though, aren’t they?
JOSH BROLIN: “Which is phenomenal. He made a mistake and he lied and I think there’s been proper consequence for that, but to want to impeach somebody because of that and then to not impeach somebody under impeachable acts, not going forth with it is phenomenal. It’s stunning to me, some of the reactions of the American people. And it’s also stunning to me that by speaking up, which I think is very important, there are these blogs that say ‘why does this guy speak up, why does Susan Sarandon say anything, why does Sean Penn say anything?’. Why would you try and stifle that? It’s good isn’t it? We’re the ones that vote so we’re the ones who should speak up regardless of what job you have, whether you’re an actor, a plumber or a reporter.”
Has Brolin ever met one of the people he alleges to exist and then blames? Has he seen the polls, the activism, the local and state resolutions, the actions of the Democratic "leadership"? Does he believe we have democracy and that he can therefore blame the people for whatever Washington does? Should someone who believes such things be permitted to drive a car?
Republican Calvin Coolidge visited Vermont eighty years ago this fall to deliver one of the last speeches of his presidency, a paean to his native state in which he predicted, "If the spirit of liberty should vanish in other parts of the Union and support of our institutions should languish, it could all be replenished from the generous store held by the people of this brave little state of Vermont." Vermonters appreciated the line so much that they inscribed it on their statehouse.
A judge has ordered the Justice Department to produce White House memos that provide the legal basis for the Bush administration's post-Sept. 11 warrantless wiretapping program.
U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy Jr. signed an order Friday requiring the department to produce the memos by the White House legal counsel's office by Nov. 17. He said he will review the memos in private to determine if any information can be released publicly without violating attorney-client privilege or jeopardizing national security.
Kennedy issued his order in response to lawsuits by civil liberties groups in 2005 after news reports disclosed the wiretapping.
A simple question:
After Barack Obama is swept into office next tuesday, at the crest of a wave that embodies the rejection of the last eight years of George W. Bush's maladministration of this country, is there any reason why the first order of business on November 5 should not be impeaching Bush and Cheney for their high crimes against the nation?
I write this diary because there are a number of articles floating around today suggesting that Bush will use the last two months of his presidency to do everything in his power to thoroughly trash the place. Emptywheel has been theorizing for weeks about which war criminals and torture enablers will receive presidential pardons in their Christmas stockings.
Ralph Nader Proclaims Five Counts for Impeachment of George W. Bush to PR.com in Candid Interview
In an interview with PR.com’s Senior Editor, Allison Kugel, Ralph Nader details five charges for alleged credible impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
In an interview conducted by PR.com Senior Editor, Allison Kugel, Ralph Nader details his case for the call to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. He also accuses Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John McCain of turning their backs on these alleged charges.
Pelosi: Good morning Cindy.
Sheehen: Good morning Ms. Pelosi.
Pelosi: Good morning to you.
Sheehan: It´s nice to talk to you.
Pelosi: My pleasure.
Sheehan: Um. Well first you answer the question about the debate which I think that you-- if you really cared about the voters in San Francisco you could find an hour to debate your opponents, because you do have some opponents here in San Francisco. You haven´t had a town hall meeting...
Krasny interrupts: ´Scuse me, Cindy Sheehan, you had a question you wanted to ask the Speaker?
Sheehan: I do. I do. Over 60% of this district in 2006 voted for an impeachment resolution and I just want to know why you haven´t represented the people of your district and why you haven´t impeached George Bush and Dick Cheney. And you still have time.
Krasny: Alright, thank you for that direct question.
Pelosi: Thank you Cindy. First may I commend Cindy for her race for congress and again express the respect that I have for her for her courage in speaking out in what she believes in, so articulately.
The issue of impeachment is a very controversial one in my own caucus and certainly in the country. The idea that if we disagree with the president we should begin impeachment proceedings is one, that is again, controversial. There are those who believe they have the evidence that the president would be convicted if impeached. Um. I don´t know that we have seen that. I have said that the people who would like to see the president impeached the most are the Republicans. They should love to see the Democrats, as soon as we took power, go down the path of impeaching the president, dividing the country, and neglecting what we wanted to do on minimum wage, and children´s health, and veterans´ benefits and the rest of that, because it would totally consume the congress. It is, again, again, controversial, but if I honestly believed that the president had violated the Constitution of the United States, and if my colleagues believed that, I think you would have seen the president impeached.