The board of directors of the ACLU of Southern California has passed a resolution calling for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for their abuses of basic civil liberties.
“President Bush has violated his oath of office to ‘protect, preserve, and defend the Constitution,’ has subverted the system and structure of democratic government, and has otherwise engaged in a course of conduct that warrants removal from office,” the board’s resolution states.
The ACLU/SC board urges the House of Representatives to investigate impeachable offenses by the President and Vice President, including:
• Manipulating intelligence before the Iraq War and deceiving the American people about imminent threats they faced.
• Authorizing the torture of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and other military prisons and handing over suspects to other nations who tortured them (a practice known as “extraordinary rendition”).
• Authorizing the firing of federal prosecutors for political reasons and obstructing justice by defying Congressional subpoenas investigating the firing.
• Authorizing wiretaps on U.S. citizens without warrants and in violation of the Constitution, and concealing the program from Congress and the public.
• Conspiring to disclose the name of Valerie Plame, a covert agent in the Central Intelligence Agency. This action risked her life and the lives of her intelligence contacts.
“This White House has broken American law and deceived the American people, not just once but again and again,” said ACLU/SC board president Alan Toy. “Congress has a duty to hold President Bush and Vice President Cheney responsible for their actions, and history certainly will.”
For more information, contact the ACLU of So Cal pressroom at (213)977-5252 or email [email protected]
“When taken in concert with the statements and actions of the Administration over the past year regarding Iran, the National Intelligence Estimate reveals a pattern of willful deceit directed at the U.S. Congress, the American people, and the rest of the world on the critical matters of war and peace.”
He also pointed out that this most recent revelation, of an Administration’s deaf ear to facts, shouldn’t surprise us:
“More than three months ago, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Iran was cooperating with inspection procedures and demanded that the Bush Administration disclose any alleged evidence regarding such a program. None was provided. More than a month ago, Russian President Putin revealed findings by his own nation’s intelligence services and announced that there was no credible evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program.
“Yet, in the face of both sets of findings, this Administration continued its drumbeat for war. Just this past week, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, with the NIE in his hands, was trying to arm-twist our NATO allies and the Republic of China into pressuring the U.N. Security Council to impose additional sanctions on Iran because of its alleged weapons program.
As many of you know, Kucinich’s push for Impeachment has been concerned specifically with this Administration’s actions regarding intelligence for War; Iraq, as well as Iran. In fact, Article Three of the impeachment resolution reads:
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, 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, February 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 counterproductive to the national security of the United States.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Kucinich pointed out that since it now seems publicly evident that the Administration willfully falsified the facts regarding their weapons program, it is now time for Congress to investigate the mater:
“I call on the Congress to launch an immediate investigation into what our intelligence agencies knew and when they knew it. I believe such an investigation will further build the case for the impeachment of both the President and the Vice President. The fact that the President recently raised the specter of a possible World War III in public comments regarding Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program — when he knew full well that Iran had no such program – should seriously be considered as a high crime. And, the fact that he and his Vice President have pursued plans for our military to drop 30,000-pound bunker buster bombs on Iranian nuclear research facilities constitutes a war crime.”
And really how couldn’t you? Because I want to lay it down here: anyone who hopes to hold our highest office must support accountability for that office. It is time for our other candidates to join Kucinich in pushing for an investigation. Biden has seems to have started to firt with the idea, but we need the pressure from all of our Candidates. The more public and popular, the more pressure their statements will create. Where are they?
Well, Dennis Kucinich continues to speak for America rather than gross party politics. Speaking in New Hampshire, Wednesday, Kucinich stated:
the vow from his party’s leadership in Congress to stand up to President Bush on ending the war in Iraq amounts to a “total fraud.”
The Ohio congressman said the most recent House-passed plan to set a timetable for ending the war still would permit permanent bases in Iraq and allow Americans soldiers to train Iraqi military and police and to fight off insurgents.
It really does seem to me that only Kucinich understands, or at least is willing to admit, that this country is in serious danger right now. Kucinich, seems alone among the candidates who believes that this election is much less about reclaiming the White House for the Democratic Party, than it is about reclaiming the United States for all of its citizens.
Yet, there is such a disconnect within our political system that the Democratic Leadership will not act upon the wishes of a majority of Americans regarding the war/occupation or even in protecting the essence of our Democracy through accountability and beginning impeachment investigations. As kucinich duly noted:
“I think the outrage is building among the voting public, but to the political system, it’s business as usual.”
State Rep. Betty Hall, D-Brookline, who attended, decided to endorse Kucinich after he forced consideration of V.P. Cheney’s Impeachment a few weeks ago. Hall tried to bring in a non-binding resolution to the New Hampshire House supporting an impeachment proceeding against Bush and Cheney, which House leaders from both parties opposed, not allowing an up or down vote.
“It isn’t popular to speak up; I know. When I spoke in the Legislature, some people were angry, but we must talk about it. We must learn about it,” Hall said.
Hall also showed Kucinich an article in the New Hampshire State Constitution, which reads inpart:
“The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and repression is absurd, slavish and destructive of the good of all mankind.”
Kucinich, who is now promising to bring more detailed articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush, said:
“I’m going to quote that language from the New Hampshire Constitution all over the country. Clearly New Hampshire is the place to bring this message.
Seems fitting for New Hampshire: “Live free or die”…
Kucinich will be a leading speaker Monday night at Dartmouth College for an “Impeachment Teach-In” sponsored by state and national liberal-leaning organizations.
A famous US patriot once said “These are the times that try men’s souls.” At the time, he spoke of the events and circumstances surrounding the birth of a nation destined to be defined by the rights and freedoms of the people; a nation led by government of the People, by the People and for the People, where leaders could inspire the People to stand united in spite of differing opinions or particular religious influence.
The advent of the twenty-first century has marked the most severe departure from our founding principles than ever before. We stand on the brink of self-immolation, leaderless and adrift, while selfish, arrogant hypocrites steer our ship of state toward the shoals.
Should we fail now to grow resolute and united in our determination to right this ship, we fail not only ourselves but our children, and their children’s children.
It is time to look to those children for inspiration and a reminder of what we, as adults, are tasked with as parents and guardians: to create and foster an environment where children can grow to adulthood, secure in the knowledge that we have passed along the best models for ethical leadership and responsible stewardship of this nation that we know how.
And a little child shall lead them
On Tuesday, September 6, 2005, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, an article appeared in the New York Times about a curious band of refugees that walked into a Baton Rouge evacuation point: six children, comprised of five toddlers following a six year old boy carrying a five month old child:
They were holding hands. Three of the children were about 2 years old. A 3-year-old girl, who wore colorful barrettes on the ends of her braids, had her 14-month-old brother in tow. The 6-year-old spoke for all of them, and he told rescuers his name was Deamonte Love.
Leadership, in action, during a time where the adult leadership of the nation was focused on trying not to appear wholly incompetent.
They failed.
In times of crisis, a nation needs to have faith in the capacity of its appointed leaders to step in and guide them safely through. Taken in that context, our “leaders” have not simply failed — they have failed miserably, to the point where we can no longer think of them as “leaders” at all: that was the turning point where a more critical, if jaundiced, eye was cast upon their actions, and their carefully-constructed façade began to crumble to dust around them.
They were brutally upstaged by the simple competence of a small child.1
Those self-same leaders, who proclaim their compassion for fellow citizens and their love for children, ardently oppose abortion rights for women — and equally oppose providing insurance for millions of uninsured children. They claim to support scientific research, but stand firm against fully embracing stem cell research while hypocritically claiming successful justification of their idiocy by pointing at the work of foreign scientists — scientists who are forging ahead in the field, while our own endeavors flounder here at home.2
Where have all the (adult) leaders gone?
In the year 2007, that question has been asked repeatedly, with growing emphasis. An eighty-two years old businessman by the name of Lee Iacocca even wrote a book with a very similar title: Where Have All the Leaders Gone?3 In order to find out where to look for leadership, and how to recognize it, we should take a peek inside the cover. The opening passages of the book alone should have sounded a clarion call to the would-be and wanna-be leaders of today:
I hardly recognize this country anymore. The President of the United States is given a free pass to ignore the Constitution, tap our phones, and lead us to war on a pack of lies.
Congress responds to record deficits by passing a huge tax cut for the wealthy (thanks, but I don’t need it). The most famous business leaders are not the innovators but the guys in handcuffs. While we’re fiddling in Iraq, the Middle East is burning and nobody seems to know what to do. And the press is waving pom-poms instead of asking hard questions.
Iacocca shouts out that he’d love to sit back and let the youth lead the charge against the encroaching apathy and ongoing destruction of our nation, but the youth is currently distracted and disillusioned. Our children and our young adults — by far one of the bigger factions of the public — don’t trust our politicians to represent their interests; he doesn’t blame them for this, but wants them to wake up and realize that only by standing up and participating in the system can they hope to change it for the better. He laments that we have created “a hell of a mess” and must all pitch in to clean it up.
So here’s where we stand. We’re immersed in a bloody war with no plan for winning and no plan for leaving. We’re running the biggest deficit in the history of the country. We’re losing the manufacturing edge to Asia, while our once-great companies are getting slaughtered by health care costs. Gas prices are skyrocketing, and nobody in power has a coherent energy policy. Our schools are in trouble. Our borders are like sieves. The middle class is being squeezed every which way. These are times that cry out for leadership.
But when you look around, you’ve got to ask: “Where have all the leaders gone?” Where are the curious, creative communicators? Where are the people of character, courage, conviction, competence, and common sense?
Those people are the ones who appear to be missing in action. Our Congress holds the responsibility to bring oversight and accountability to the workings of the government, particularly the Executive Branch;
I have news for the gang in Congress. We didn’t elect you to sit on your asses and do nothing and remain silent while our democracy is being hijacked and our greatness is being replaced with mediocrity. What is everybody so afraid of? That some bobblehead on Fox News will call them a name? Give me a break. Why don’t you guys show some spine for a change?
[…snip…]
You don’t get anywhere by standing on the sidelines waiting for somebody else to take action. Whether it’s building a better car or building a better future for our children, we all have a role to play.
We all have a role to play. We need our Congress to play its role and to actively put the wayward Executive Branch back on track. We ourselves need to drop the veil of false civility and inject the righteous anger and frustration of our national plight into the public discourse — it is no longer time for political correctness, it’s time for political correction.
A Child’s Lead and a Childish Leader: Political Correction vs. “Politically Correct”
The legacy of the Republican Party of this day and age can be summed up in the person of their de facto creation: George W. Bush, and the malAdministration that he leads. Juxtaposed against pretty words carefully calculated to say one thing while supporting the opposite, the legacy of Bush Republicans is one of malignant deceit. They claim support of science, yet undermine any research that doesn’t support their politics in spite of the harm to the public or to national security. They claim to be strong on national security, yet gut the programs that would most help the nation and provide true security in order to prop up failed adventures as “successful” — all the while causing more harm than good. They loudly insist that they have created a better, stronger system for education while creating a system where states and schools are practically encouraged to misreport statistics in order to continue receiving funds. Is are children learning became a national embarrassment, along with the memorable phrase Childrens do learn,4 both brought to the forefront of national discourse by the ignoble head of the Republican Party and purported “leader” of the free world. Bush Republicans also support and extol the virtues of misnamed national policies like The Clean Air Act or Healthy Forests. These morally bankrupt hypocrites claim their support of severe restrictions on embryonic stem cell research helps children and credit research by others in another nation as evidence of their argument, and they aggressively push for war in the name of peace.5
It is a legacy of deceit, denial and dissembly.
It’s time we stood tall and dropped the false cover that political correctness provides to those who excel in prevarication. We need to be direct. We need to be forceful. We need to be blunt.
The child appeared to be imitating something she had seen — probably more than once — when associated with the man standing in front of her. But unlike the parent who quickly and gently hid her action from view, the child’s gesture demonstrated exactly the type of blunt, direct and peaceful confrontation that our adult selves have been sorely deficient in. Fortunately, it is a deficiency that is not complete.
Indeed, some Americans have already figured out that the best way to confront the hypocrisy is to visibly challenge those most responsible for it. In this clip, Richard “Dick” Cheney has his own words from the Senate floor (June 25, 2004) quoted back to him in the aftermath of Katrina, when the Bush officials finally decided it was safe to attempt a few photo ops:
Another adult who stood up to the Bush Administration, directly confronting Bush with dignity and grace, was Harry Taylor, a man who is now running for Congress:
These occurrences are, however, too few and far between. In the interest of our national well-being and the future of both the nation and the children who have lent us the temporary custody of it, we have to do better. Congress has to do better. Our next President has to do better. The current crop of ethically challenged and fiscally irresponsible Republicans know that if they are confronted — if the people begin to stand up and demand answers, criticizing the constant stream of noxious nonsense that is being spread thickly over the landscape — then they will lose their grip on power. They know they will likely lose billions in ill-gotten gains. And some of them, if we are truly diligent in our pursuit of truth and justice, may just end up in jail. They know this, and they are striving to push back against it. They have stooped so low as to repeat and augment the Nixon-era’s challenge that “if the President does it, it’s legal” — they even attempt to quiet dissent by challenging it with the language of treason, while in actuality it is their own actions that betray the nation and her people.
We, the People of the United States of America, need to ensure that this happens. If not for ourselves, then do it for the children. They’re watching us, and will learn from our mistakes as well as our successes — but shouldn’t we try to demonstrate how much better it is to chalk up successes in the fight for freedom and democracy?
Set an example; throw the bums out, try them in accordance with the law, not in a kangaroo court, and when they are justly convicted ensure that they are justly imprisoned.
Namaste.
____________________________________________
Notes and Additional Video Support:
____________________________________________
1. Children have made headlines even more recently as enfants provocateurs (h/t Reason Online via Dawg’sBlog). From News24, an African online news source, comes this story on June 21, 2007:
Cops charge 3-year-old ‘rioter’
21/06/2007 13:44 – (SA)
Patna, India – Police in India have charged a three-year-old boy for allegedly leading a group of rioters and firing at security personnel, the toddler’s uncle said on Thursday.
[…snip…]
This news, of course, comes on the heels of a story from the previous month, detailing that charges were dropped against a six year old boy who was accused of molesting and assaulting a woman in her thirties, again in India.
Those kids in India…gotta watch ’em every minute. ;P
Mr. Spinmeister neglected to mention a few key facts in his apologetic zeal to lay the wreath of discovery at the feet of George Bush. To make a a skin cell behave like an embryonic stem cell, a couple of things go without saying: you’d have to know what an embryonic stem cell does. It would be damn helpful to have worked with human cells, particularly skin cells and embryonic stem cells. And that might be an obstacle if you happened to live in a country where having the latter is an expensive, over regulated pain in the ass specifically because of the unpopular policy of a certain unpopular President. Which may explain in part why this breakthrough occurred in Japan.
3. Iacocca, Lee and Catherine Whitney. Where Have All the Leaders Gone?; New York: Scribner, 2007. ISBN 1-416-53247-1. Citations and initial link in the piece above via Snopes.
4. This DailyKos diary by buffalo provided a most excellent and relevant YouTube video containing two key clips of education-related Bush malapropisms: George W. Bush: Childrens do learn!, posted 28 September 2007:
5. War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Etc., etc. From Always Tell the Truth, posted by TileNut on April 16, 2006.
Free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don’t attack each other. Free nations don’t develop weapons of mass destruction.
Dennis Kucinich will introduce privileged resolution to force a vote on V.P. Cheney’s impeachment resolution this week, probably Tuesday. It is critical that we voice our support and contact our Representatives ASAP to let them know how we feel.
However, he is reaching out to us, the American people, to do our part and claim responsibility to reclaim our constitutional democracy. Dennis understands that real change and meaningful reform can’t happen without the active support of the people, and so he will be holding a live, national conference call Monday evening, November 5th, to explain how everything will work and what we can do to help. From the Kucinich campaign website:
Dennis will host a live, nationwide conference call on Monday, November 5th, beginning at about 7:30 p.m. (Eastern Time), to announce what will be happening in the House of Representatives this week regarding the Cheney impeachment resolution – and to ask for your help.
The call-in number is (641) 715-3300.
When the operator asks for an access code, key in 324341#.
The call is open to all interested citizens.
The time to act is now. We have to contact our Representatives to gain support. We have to contact the Democratic leadership and explain that no part of our Constituion, including impeachment, is “off the table”.
Off the table!? It is important to note why Kucinich is moving this forward: there is wide popular support for it! Over 80 cities/towns have now passed impeachment resolutions, with 50 more pending, and major polls, such as Zogby, have indicated a majority of Americans support impeachment proceedings. However, the Democratic leadership, members of Congress, and the MSM have failed to listen to the American people. As Kucinich noted at the San Mateo Straw Poll:
“If Congress did the right thing, they would be talking … about impeachment…
“I introduced House Resolution 333 because I heard from the American people and they said they wanted some response to make Dick Cheney accountable for the statements that he made that took us into a war based on lies. And the statements he made that would take us into a conflict against Iran. Again, more lies.
“The President is now openly invoking the specter of World War III with respect to Iran. He ought to be held accountable also. I’m the only member of Congress who stepped forward on the issue of making Dick Cheney accountable. And now we have 21 members who’ve joined me. That’s a step in the right direction. But I’m going to go beyond that. I’m going to call a privileged resolution, at which point, would force a vote — at least if it’s only on a procedural motion — members are going to have to confront this issue of impeachment. They’re not going to escape it. This is a question of defending our Constitution. It really is.
Just as our Congressional Representatives have gone deaf to the voice of millions of Americans, we, like the Constitution, have gone dumb to this Administration. And Kucinich understands this:
“Despite this groundswell of opposition to the unconstitutional conduct of office, Vice President Cheney continues to violate the U.S. Constitution by insisting the power of the executive branch is supreme.
“Congress must hold the Vice President accountable. The American people need to let Members of Congress know how they feel about this. The Vice President continues to use his office to advocate for a continued occupation of Iraq and prod our nation into a belligerent stance against Iran. If the Vice President is successful, his actions will ensure decades of disastrous consequences.”
So here we are. Kucinich is giving us a chance to let Congress know how we feel, while holding them and this Administration accountable for their actions. There will be a vote. People will have to make a decision. People will have to take action. And we who believe in the principles of this country have to act first. This is our country, our government and our consequences if we stand idly by.
1.) In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, 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
2.) In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, 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
3.) In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, 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
H. Res. 333, Articles of Impeachment against the Vice President, has 21 cosponsors. They are: Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Robert Brady (D-PA), Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN), Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA), Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Henry Johnson (D-GA), Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA), Rep. James Moran (D-VA), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA), Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and Rep. Albert Wynn (D-MD).
he will go before the U.S. House of Representatives on a point of personal privilege to move the impeachment of Dick Cheney. Mr. Kucinich stated he will bring the impeachment forward before Thanksgiving.
Kucinich introduced articles of impeachment against Vice President, Dick Cheney, back in April. H.R. 333 consists of three articles of impeachment, with supporting examples:
1.) In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, 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
2.) In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, 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
3.) In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, 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
Kucinich also provided roughly 50 supporting documents for the articles, on his Congressional website.
H.R. 333 has picked up 21 cosponsors, far short of what is needed to start proceedings, and House Speaker Pelosi has continually insisted that impeachment is “off the table”.
But, as Kucinich holds nothing higher than his duties to defend the Constitution and represent the people of the United States, Kucinich is making sure that it gets back on. when asked about the Congress’ failures to protect the Constituion, at the San Mateo Presidential Straw Poll, Kucinich replied:
“If Congress did the right thing, they would be talking … about impeachment…
“I introduced House Resolution 333 because I heard from the American people and they said they wanted some response to make Dick Cheney accountable for the statements that he made that took us into a war based on lies. And the statements he made that would take us into a conflict against Iran. Again, more lies.
“The President is now openly invoking the specter of World War III with respect to Iran. He ought to be held accountable also. I’m the only member of Congress who stepped forward on the issue of making Dick Cheney accountable. And now we have 21 members who’ve joined me. That’s a step in the right direction. But I’m going to go beyond that. I’m going to call a privileged resolution, at which point, would force a vote — at least if it’s only on a procedural motion — members are going to have to confront this issue of impeachment. They’re not going to escape it. This is a question of defending our Constitution. It really is.“
Kucinich proves yet again his courage and leadership in Representative Democracy against fear and political calculation. He proves that he will not play party politics if it is against the interests of the United States and American citizens. He proves, again, his credentials for holding our highest office. Support Dennis Kucinich!
My post about Jane Harman’s remarks at a town hall meeting yesterday about the secret “torture memos” revealed this week by the New York Times is up at Think Progress, submitted through their Blog Fellows Program, which I can’t recommend enough. Let me contextualize those remarks a bit more, and add some of the other interesting things Rep. Harman had to say.
I asked the question to Harman about the secret memos. Earlier this week, the White House claimed that all relevant members of Congress had been fully briefed on the classified program sanctioning harsh interrogation techniques by the CIA. At the time of the memos, Harman was a member of the “Gang Of Eight” routinely briefed on intelligence matters. Harman was shaking her head as I asked the question if she was fully briefed, chuckling almost in disbelief. Her answer:
We were not fully briefed. We were told about operational details but not these memos. Jay Rockefeller said the same thing, and I associate myself with his remarks. And we want to see these memos.
over…
Harman is now the third member of the Gang of Eight, joining Jay Rockefeller and Nancy Pelosi, to reject the White House’s claim that they were fully briefed about these memos. The Administration is lying, again, and it is now incumbent upon Congress to make every effort to obtain those memos and to enshrine into law a full repudiation of the arguments therein described. The follow-up question I wanted to ask Rep. Harman, but could not, was how she would go about pressuring the White House to get those documents. Obviously the vehicle for this is through the confirmation of Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey. Considering that these memos came out of the Justice Department, there should simply be no movement on his confirmation without an exchange of the memos.
Let me add some additional information about the town hall. I wrote in my Think Progress post this tidbit:
Harman later revealed that she was speaking with an unidentified Republican in her office, who told her that if President Bush were to attack Iran, then even he would vote for impeachment.
You have to understand the environment of this town hall meeting. The audience included the hardcore progressives that made up the core of the Marcy Winograd primary challenge to Harman in 2006; in fact, Winograd was on a panel right before Harman’s arrival. These people were SCREAMING for impeachment; the first two questions were about this issue. And Harman could do nothing but reiterate that Nancy Pelosi, not her, had taken impeachment off the table. She went on to describe her no votes against the Clinton impeachment and how MoveOn.org was born out of the impeachment debate (odd of her to approvingly cite MoveOn, considering she voted to condemn their remarks in the “General Betrayus” ad). But when she brought up Iran, she said “this little anecdote should make you smile,” and mentioned the above exchange.
Here are some of the other notable tidbits in Harman’s meeting.
• She recommended Jack Goldsmith’s “The Terror Presidency” as the best source for understanding how the Bush Administration attempted to expand executive power through neutering the Office of Legal Counsel. She had the book with her.
• She reiterated that “intelligence was politicized again” on the FISA bill, referring to the fake terror attack hyped by the White House designed to get wavering Democrats to sanction warrantless surveillance. It was a cold-blooded tactic, and it should be heavily publicized. I thanked Rep. Harman for speaking out on this, and I hope that she’ll continue as well as encourage other members to corroborate her allegations. Harman said she is working to change the new FISA bill, which will “probably be introduced this week.” The goals are that any surveillance must be done through the FISA court, with a warrant, and with minimization protocols if a US national is involved.
• Harman spoke about her legislation to close Guantanamo, restore habeas corpus, and end the use of national security letters outside their initial purpose. She spoke glowingly about the vote this week to put Blackwater contractors under the auspices of US law, and thanked both Rep. Waxman and Rick Jacobs, who produced Iraq for Sale, with their efforts to get the word out about Blackwater’s numerous abuses and how they fell into the “legal black hole” regarding their activities.
• She recommended the Seymour Hersh article about developments with respect to Iran, and said that she has invited him to speak to the Congress. Harman was adamant in saying that “targeted sanctions are working” with Iran, and that the government should “stop the saber rattling” that could lead us to another catastrophic war.
• She trumpeted her contribution to the House energy bill, a measure to retire the incandescent light bulb by 2012.
• On trade, she made a disappointing statement. Despite voting against NAFTA and CAFTA and claiming that she was proven right on those votes, she said that some trade deals are admissable with proper labor and environmental standards as well as trade adjustment assistance, and referring to the current Peruvian Free Trade Agreement that will come up for vote in a couple weeks, she said that “It was approved by Charlie Rangel.” Uh-oh. We know that this bill, crafted in the dead of night to appease corporate interests, does not go nearly far enough to ensure labor and environmental standards, and would be nothing more than NAFTA-light.
• Someone asked Rep. Harman about the Walt-Mearshimer book “The Israel Lobby” and AIPAC’s support for endless war, including war with Iran. Harman, who has been linked in the past to lobbies like AIPAC, said “I’m not a member of AIPAC… I support a two-state solution where Palestine can thrive economically with borders that are defensible to Israel.” She pretty much dodged the question.
• On the still-unresolved EPA waiver that would allow California to make their own rules on tailpipe emissions that contribute to global warming, Harman said that she signed on to a letter protesting the slow-rolling from the EPA and the Department of Transportation, and she added that Gov. Schwarzenegger should work harder to get DoT to “back off” (they’ve been accused of lobbying lawmakers to pressure the EPA to block the California law).
• Finally, Harman asked for education activists to call her office and tell her about the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind. While she said that Rep. Miller has claimed to her it has been improved, she said “I am prepared to oppose it” if the changes are not satisfactory.
We all know about Ellen Tauscher not knowing that Alberto Gonzales can be impeached; she cleared that one up. Now we have a report from the LA National Impeachment Center, including a lot of my fellow 41st AD delegates, on a meeting they held this week with Henry Waxman:
Towards the end of the meeting, Dorothy Reik, President of Progressive Democrats of the Santa Monica Mountains, urged Waxman to use the inherent contempt power of Congress to bring criminal charges against Bush and Cheney and their aides, hold a hearing in Congress on those charges, and then hand down the punishment, prison time. Reik expressed frustration with the refusal of Bush administration officials to testify before congressional committees, despite the fact that subpoenas had been issued.
Your witnesses aren’t showing up — They’re ignoring your subpoenas, said Reik, so it is time for you, Congressman Waxman, to recognize that there is a precedent for members of congress to initiate and follow through on criminal proceedings.
Waxman said he was unaware of the inherent contempt power. In a follow-up letter after the meeting, Winograd emailed him information on the inherent contempt precedent.
Inherent contempt hasn’t been used in decades, so it’s a little excusable. But Congressmen like Waxman ought to know about all of the tools at their disposal in fighting the intransigence of the Bush Administration and getting to the truth.
Waxman’s thoughts on other topics, including impeachment, on the flip.
Since Rep. Waxman is the most dogged investigator in the entire Congress, I think this answer to the question of impeachment is appropriate.
Congressman Waxman, Chair of the House Oversight Committee, told an impeachment
delegation meeting with him in his Los Angeles office, Tues., Aug. 7, 2007, that he would mull over
his constituents’ articulate arguments, watch the Bill Moyers’ interview on impeachment, and weigh whether there was sufficient evidence to, not just impeach, but convict Bush and Cheney. Waxman told the delegation it was not enough to believe Bush and Cheney were responsible for high crimes; his decision to support or co-sponsor an impeachment resolution must be predicated on the knowledge that there is overwhelming evidence for a conviction.
You shouldn’t put the cart before the horse when it comes to something like this. Indeed, considering that Congress keeps SANCTIONING the illegal acts undertaken by this White House, I’m not sure there’s anything illegal left that would constitute a high crime or misdemeanor. But this was an interesting exchange:
At the outset of the meeting, Waxman expressed a hesitancy to come out publicly for impeachment, explaining that his role as a vigorous investigator would be compromised by taking a stand that could be perceived as partisan or partial. Winograd responded with, At some point you, the investigator, have enough evidence to hold these criminals accountable. What is the point of continuous investigations unless an indictment or impeachment process is begun? Showing some hesitancy, Waxman insisted that a successful impeachment trial would necessitate strong and convincing evidence to persuade both Democrats and Republicans that high crimes had been committed. In the next breath, Waxman recited a litany of Bush and Cheney’s crimes, everything from the Iraq war to the outing of a CIA agent to illegal wiretapping. “You sound like you are delivering the opening argument for an impeachment trial,” said Winograd. With good humor, Waxman nodded and smiled.
Again, Congress enacted the illegal wiretapping into law last week, so I think there’s a disconnect going on here.
I’m proud of my AD delegates for holding their representative accountable and for presenting him with new information, on the subject of inherent contempt, that even he didn’t know about. Maybe in September we will see a bolder move by the Congress to end this absurdity of White House officials defying subpoenas and skipping out on hearings. And some point you can only write so many strongly worded letters.
A) I sent Representative Ellen Tauscher an email asking her to initiate impeachment proceedings against Gonzales. She (or her staff) responded via email (and again when I phoned them) that
The Attorney General serves at the pleasure of the president in a non-impeachable office. Unless convicted of an illegal act, the Attorney General cannot be removed from office without the president asking for or accepting his resignation.
B) After re-reading the U.S. Constitution, and posting here for feedback from others I concluded that Tauscher was quite wrong on this urgent point. I sent her local office the following:
3) A copy of the Constitution (because she obviously needs it).
4) A copy of my original letter requesting she start impeachment proceedings against Gonzales.
5) Her office’s response that Gonzales is not impeachable.
And as advised by mmacdDE, all pertinent excerpts are HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW!
Here’s the text of my 2nd letter to her:
Dear Representative Tauscher,
I received the enclosed email from you (or one of your staffers) in response to my message about impeaching Attorney General Alberto Gonzales (also enclosed). I was quite startled to read your claim that Gonzales is “not impeachable”. According to the U.S. Constitution he is (please read enclosed documentation). I’m hoping that your staff simply got confused about this very serious situation and sent the wrong information to me, your constituent. A good read-through of the materials I’ve been studying myself will correct that error for my neighbors and others who write to you about this.
If you yourself responded to my letter then I respectfully request that you immediately study the enclosed documents regarding Congressional impeachment of “civil officers”. It seems very clear to me (and to the American Bar Association, and to Professor Frank Bowman, all enclosed) that Mr. Gonzales is indeed impeachable.
I therefore again request that you begin impeachment proceedings against this man. He’s either lying to Congress (a triple felony) or he’s incompetent. Either way Mr. Gonzales is endangering our democracy every day he stays in office.
Please act as my reprepresentative in this urgent matter.
Sincerely,
Emily Duffy
I just received Tauscher’s response to my packet. There was a lot of repetition from the first form letter (why Gonzales is so bad, how she’s watching him carefully etc.) but this part was new, and probably as close to humble pie as she can swallow on this huge error:
I apologize for inaccuracies contained in any earlier correspondence. I want to set the record straight on my actions. I am a co-sponsor of two bills to remove Gonzales from office. On May 22, I co-sponsored H. Res. 417, which declares that the House of Representatives and the American people have lost confidence in Attorney General Gonzales. It calls on the President to nominate a new candidate capable of serving as the head of the Department of Justice. Additionally, I am a co-sponsor of H. Res. 589, introduced yesterday by Rep. Jay Inslee of Washington, which directs the House Judiciary Committee to initiate an impeachment investigation of the Attorney General. The resolution requests a formal investigation of the facts surrounding the Attorney General’s actions in order to allow Congress to determine whether articles of impeachment are appropriate.
My friends, don’t let ANYONE ever tell you that you have no political power. Here is your proof that something as simple as a letter to your Congressperson could change their position on a crucial issue (from impeachability-denier to impeachment-bill-co-sponsor in two easy steps).
I’m sure plenty of you will be angry at reading Tauscher’s lame inexplicable apology, and in a perfect world I would be as well (at least she didn’t try to lay it at some hapless staffer’s feet). I’m thrilled she changed her official position on this issue. Many of Tauscher’s votes piss me off but if she’s able to adapt to the rising power of the true political center (which is way left of her former position) then I’m willing to let her keep her job. But, the moment she slips back into DLC behavior, she’s an election target (and I think she is beginning to understand that). The key to this entire episode is that I’ve come to realize it’s MY DUTY to keep her on track.
No doubt the clout of my fellow Kossacks forced Tauscher to immediately examine her claims about Gonzales’ un-impeachabilty and for that I greatly thank you. Tauscher seems willing to mend her Blue Dog ways (time will tell) and no doubt we (collectively) can pressure the rest of this misguided pack to join her in moving towards the base. Or they can start packing their bags.
Meteor Blades provided the list earlier today. If your Representative is on this list, you need to get up in their face!
Be sure to sign John Edwards’ petition. They plan to
…send one copy of the Constitution to Gonzales’ office for every person who signs our petition. If we reach our goal of 40,000 signatures, we will add all the names to the biggest copy of the Constitution you have ever seen – and send that to his office too!
I apologize for inaccuracies contained in any earlier correspondence. I want to set the record straight on my actions. I am a co-sponsor of two bills to remove Gonzales from office. On May 22, I co-sponsored H. Res. 417, which declares that the House of Representatives and the American people have lost confidence in Attorney General Gonzales. It calls on the President to nominate a new candidate capable of serving as the head of the Department of Justice. Additionally, I am a co-sponsor of H. Res. 589, introduced yesterday by Rep. Jay Inslee of Washington, which directs the House Judiciary Committee to initiate an impeachment investigation of the Attorney General. The resolution requests a formal investigation of the facts surrounding the Attorney General’s actions in order to allow Congress to determine whether articles of impeachment are appropriate […]
You have to appreciate someone who can admit they were wrong.
