OMNI NEWSLETTER #2
FOR IMPEACHMENT OF BUSH AND CHENEY: REPORTS, OPINION, COMMENT
BUILDING
A CULTURE OF PEACE AND JUSTICE
JUNE
17, 2007, EDITOR: Dick Bennett
SPECIAL
NUMBER 2 ON IMPEACHING
PRESIDENT BUSH AND VICE-PRESIDENT CHENEY
(First Impeachment Newsletter December 7, 2006)
The materials that follow should provide all with rich
information for letters, columns, talks, calls.
See at end to communicate with Lincoln, Pryor, and Boozman.
PLEASE
VOTE IN THE NATIONAL CHENEY IMPEACHMENT POLL (and an argument for impeaching
Cheney first)
Yesterday, another member of the U.S. House signed on to
H.Res. 333, the Kucinich proposal to impeach Cheney first. Maxine Waters becomes the 8th co-sponsor so
far. She is speaking out now. How about you?
ACTION PAGE: http://www.actspeak.com/cheney_impeachment.php
You can vote yes, or you can vote no. All we are asking is for you to express your
opinion, just as 65,000 of your fellow concerned and active citizens have
already. The question on the action page
is, "Do you think Cheney should be impeached or not?"
Some people have written us to say they want Bush impeached
at the SAME time or nothing. But
impeaching Cheney is ALL about impeaching Bush as well. Cheney is the one pumping Bush up with all
the dictator talk. Cheney is the prime
mover behind the shredding of the Constitution.
The fastest way to constrain Bush, and to impeach him as well, is to
take on Cheney first. The road to
impeaching Bush is through Cheney, who is not only the least popular, but also
the most guilty.
We are not asking you to predict if enough OTHER people will
speak out to make this happen. We are
asking YOU to speak out. Whether you
will yourself, that you can surely know, because all you have to do is click a
mouse one time.
ACTION PAGE: http://www.actspeak.com/cheney_impeachment.php
Some have written us to say that time is short until the
next election. Unfortunately it is not
short enough to keep Cheney from using nuclear weapons as he is pushing so hard
to do to before then. Only by
confronting him with impeachment can we possibly hope to keep them from turning
the debacle they have already created in the Middle East into the literal end
of our world. The only reason members of
Congress are signing on to this initiative is because you ARE speaking
out. They will not do it on their
own. It has to come from US, we the
people.
The New York Times
and CBS News have reported what we
had already heard that Cheney is determined to suck the U.S. into a shooting
war with Iran, provoked through back channels with Israel, if he can't force
that policy on Bush any other way. We are
in greater danger of the strategic debacle in the Middle East spinning wildly
out of control every day that Congress does not act.
If you still like the vice president a lot in the face of
all this and think he is doing a great job we welcome your no vote. Otherwise, please vote yes to impeach. It could save all of our lives. It could save YOUR life, all of it. Help turn the National Cheney Impeachment
Poll into a national phenomenon. That's
where we are going with this. We can do
it with your help. All we have to do is
get enough people to say he SHOULD be impeached, and he will be impeached.
The situation is so extreme that The New York Times published an editorial last week, and we quote
just some of its conclusions below. How
can anyone read these words of alarm and not be at LEAST motivated to at
express an OPINION. They are finally
speaking out. How about you?
DICK CHENEY RULES
New York Times Editorial
June 3, 2007
The Associated Press reported that Mr. Cheney's office
ordered the Secret Service last September to destroy all records of visitors to
the official vice presidential mansion right after The Washington Post sued
foraccess to the logs. That move was made in secret, naturally. It came out
only because of another lawsuit, filed by a private group, Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, seeking the names of conservative
religious figures who visited the vice president's residence
This disdain for accountability is distressing, but not
surprising. Mr. Cheney has had it on display from his first days in office,
when he refused to name the energy-industry executives who met with him behind
closed doors to draft an energy policy.
In a similar way, Mr. Cheney seems unconcerned about little
things like checks and balances and traditional American notions of judicial
process. At one point, he gave himself
the power to selectively declassify documents and selectively leak them to
reporters. In a recent commencement address, he declaimed against prisoners who
had the gall to demand the protections of the Geneva Convention and the
Constitution of the United States.
Mr. Cheney is the driving force behind the Bush
administrations theory of the unitary executive, which holds that no one,
including Congress and the courts, has the power to supervise or regulate the
actions of the president. Just as he pays little attention to old-fangled
notions of the separation of powers, Mr. Cheney does not overly bother himself
about the bright line that should exist between his last job as chief of the
energy giant Halliburton and his current one on the public payroll.
From 2001 to 2005, Mr. Cheney received deferred salary
payments from Halliburton that far exceeded what taxpayers gave him. Mr. Cheney
still holds hundreds of thousands of stock options that have ballooned by
millions of dollars as Halliburton profited handsomely from the war in Iraq.
Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are
supposed to be ours, and forward this message to everyone else you know.
If you would like to get alerts like these, you can do so at
http://www.actspeak.com/in.htm
Powered by The People's Email Network
Copyright 2007, Patent pending, All rights reserved
GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT: REACHING FOR DICTATORSHIP
Directive gives Bush
dictatorial power
National Security &
Homeland Security Presidential Directive establishes "National Continuity
Policy"
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHI20070521&articleId=5720
Bush To Be Dictator In A Catastrophic Emergency
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=ROG20070521&articleId=5721
Slip of the tongue? Rumsfeld admits that "Flight 93"
was shot down
VIDEO Footage and
transcripts
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20070512&articleId=5626
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHI20070521&articleId=5720
NEW POLL SHOWS PUBLIC FOR IMPEACHMENT
Here is the result of the recent MSNBC poll regarding
impeachment: 88% of America approves, and wants, impeachment.
Do you believe President Bush's actions justify
impeachment? * 437015
responses
Yes, between the
secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to
justify putting him on trial.
88%
No, like any
president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching "high
crimes and misdemeanors."
4.4%
No, the man has done
absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching.
6%
I don't know. 1.9%
BUSH CONTINUES TO ATTACK THE CONSTITUTION—AND UNDER THE
PRETENSE OF PROTECTING IT (from Chris D)
Bush Anoints Himself as the Insurer of Constitutional
Government in Emergency
By Matthew Rothschild-May 18, 2007-
Taken from http://progressive.org/mag_wx051807
With scarcely a mention in the mainstream media, President Bush has ordered up
a plan for responding to a catastrophic attack. In a new National Security
Presidential Directive, Bush lays out his plans for dealing with a
“catastrophic emergency.”
Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal
government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the
responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”
He laid this all out in a document entitled “National Security Presidential
Directive/NSPD 51” and “Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20.”
The White House released it on May 9.
Other than a discussion on Daily Kos led off by a posting by Leo Fender, and a
pro-forma notice in a couple of mainstream newspapers, this document has gone
unremarked upon.
The subject of the document is entitled “National Continuity Policy.”
It defines a “catastrophic emergency” as “any incident, regardless of location,
that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption
severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy,
or government function.”
This could mean another 9/11, or another Katrina, or a major earthquake in
California, I imagine, since it says it would include “localized acts of
nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies.”
The document emphasizes the need to ensure “the continued function of our form
of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three
separate branches of government,” it states.
But it says flat out: “The President shall lead the activities of the Federal
Government for ensuring constitutional government.”
The document waves at the need to work closely with the other two branches,
saying there will be “a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative,
and judicial branches of the Federal Government.” But this effort will be
“coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the
legislative and judicial
branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers.”
Among the efforts coordinated by the President would ensuring the capability of
the three branches of government to “provide for orderly succession” and
“appropriate transition of leadership.”
The document designates a National Continuity Coordinator, who would be the
Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.
Currently holding that post is Frances Fragos Townsend.
She is required to develop a National Continuity Implementation Plan and submit
it within 90 days.
As part of that plan, she is not only to devise procedures for the Executive
Branch but also give guidance to “state, local, territorial, and tribal
governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical
infrastructure.”
The secretary of Homeland Security is also directed to develop planning
guidance for “private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators,” as
well as state, local, territorial, and tribal governments.
The document gives the Vice President a role in implementing the provisions of
the contingency plans.
“This directive shall be implanted in a manner that is consistent with, and
facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution
concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the
Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 USC 19), with the consultation of the
Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved.”
The document also contains “classified Continuity Annexes.”
LINDORFF’S CASE FOR IMPEACHMENT AND REBUKE TO THE
DEMOCRATS.
From: Dave Lindorff [mailto:dlindorff@mindspring.com]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 10:21 AM
Subject: Impeach Bush or Get Rid of the Impeachment Clause
Impeach this President, or Remove the Impeachment Clause
By Dave Lindorff
What is it about
impeachment that has the Democratic Party leadership so frightened?
Talking with members of Congress, one hears the same
refrain: ³I know Bush and Cheney have committed impeachable crimes, but
impeachment is a bad idea.²
The rationales offered are many, but all are either specious
or based upon flawed reasoning. Let¹s consider them separately:
Excuse one, offered by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, is that
impeachment would be a diversion from Democrats¹ main goals of ending the Iraq
War, and passing important legislation. The reality, of course, is that many of
the administration¹s impeachable acts relate directly to the war, so hearings
would only build support for ending it. Meanwhile, with the slim majorities in
both houses, Democrats cannot pass any significant progressive legislation that
could survive a veto (or a presidential signing statement) and the record shows
it.
Excuse two is that impeachment is divisive. This seems the
height of absurdity. When voters handed Congress to the Democrats, they knew
they were setting the stage for divided government. That was the whole point.
Moreover, divisiveness in Washington has largely emanated
from the White House, not from Congress. Anyhow, given administration
intransigence on all the issues that matter to Democrats, they have no
alternative but to take a stand.
Excuse three is a claim that the public opposes impeachment.
This is simply wrong. The few straightforward scientific polls done on
impeachment, such as one published by Newsweek last October, show a majority of
Americans to want it. Furthermore, if Bush has committed impeachable acts, it
is inappropriate for House members, all of whom swore to uphold and defend the
Constitution, not to act.
Excuse four is that old canard that impeaching Bush would
mean making Cheney president‹a deliberately scary prospect but one which any
politician in Washington knows is garbage. Firstly, if Cheney were to become
president because of a Bush impeachment or resignation, it would only be for a
few months, and given his stunning lack of support among the public‹currently
about 9 percent and falling‹he would be the lamest of lame ducks, unable to do
anything. But more importantly, his own party would be certain to remove him
before any removal of Bush, and for exactly that reason‹they would not want to
be going into the 2008 election with Cheney as party leader. This is exactly
what happened to Spiro Agnew, whom a Republican attorney general managed to
indict and remove before the collapse of Nixon¹s presidency. The same thing can
be expected to happen to Cheney, who would surely face either a sudden health
crisis, or an indictment for corruption.
Finally, excuse five is that the president¹s crimes and
abuses of power need to be proven before any impeachment bill. This is
completely backwards. An impeachment bill can be filed by any member of
Congress who believes the president has violated the Constitution. At that
point, it is up to the House Judiciary Committee to consider the bill¹s merits
and decide whether to ask the full House to authorize impeachment hearings. It
is at an impeachment hearing where investigations should proceed. After all,
only after the Judiciary Committee votes out an impeachment article can the
full House consider whether to actually impeach. Calling for investigations
before an impeachment hearing is like asking for an investigation before a
grand jury investigation. It¹s redundant, simply a dodge.
Besides, some of this president¹s high crimes are
self-evident. Take the case of Bush¹s ordering the National Security Agency to
spy on Americans¹ communications without a warrant. A federal judge has already
labeled this violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act a felony.
There is no denying this felony occurred, or that Bush is responsible. The only
question the House needs to vote on is whether the felony is a ³high crime²
warranting impeachment.
The same applies Bush¹s refusal to enact over 1200 laws or
parts of laws duly passed by Congress. Bush doesn¹t deny that he has usurped
the power of the Congress, as laid down in Article I of the Constitution.
Rather, he asserts‹with no basis in the wording of that document‹that as
commander in chief in the war on terror, he has the ³unitary executive²
authority to ignore acts of Congress. Again, there is no need for an
³investigation² to establish whether this happened. What Congress must do is
decide whether this usurpation of its Constitutional role is an impeachable
abuse of power.
Likewise the president¹s authorization of kidnap and
torture. We know the president okayed torture. We know too, that he used his
³unitary executive² claim to refuse to accept a law passed overwhelmingly by
the last Congress outlawing torture. Finally, we know the president did not, as
required by US and international law, act to halt torture and punish those up
the chain of command who oversaw systematic, widespread torture.
There are many impeachable crimes by this president (and
vice president), such as obstruction of justice in the Valeria Plame outing
case, conspiracy (or treason) in the Niger ³yellowcake² document forgery
scandal, conspiracy to engage in election fraud, lying to Congress, criminal
negligence in responding to the Katrina disaster, bribery and war profiteering,
etc., which would require Judiciary Committee investigations.
In the meantime,
though, Democrats need to step up to their responsibility.
If this president is
not to be impeached, Congress may as well the Constitution to remove the
impeachment clause. It will, in that case, have become as much an anachronism
as prohibition.
About the author: Philadelphia journalist Dave Lindorff is
co-author, with Barbara Olshansky, of ³The Case for Impeachment: The Legal
Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office² (St. Martin¹s
Press, 2006 and due out in paperback later this month). His work is available
at www.thiscantbehappening.net <http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/>
.
From Carl Barnwell: I would debate one point in excuse four -
In
the case where Bush is removed, Cheney may be the "lamest of lame
ducks" but I believe that Cheney
could wreak a lot of damage in those few months. Cheney
and Bush must both go (the sooner the better).
I would remind you of John
Nichols' most recent book in which he argues that
impeachment
was not meant to be used rarely and sparingly but was meant to be used often in order prevent the very situation we have
with this current administration. The Founders understood the
intoxication, aggrandizement, and usurpation of power. It
is for this reason that the Founders gave impeachment so much space in the
Constitution.
The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders'
Cure for Royalism (Paperback)
by John Nichols
|
|
|
||
|
Powell's Chief of Staff Proposes Impeachment Thursday 10 May 2007 On Thursday, May 10, 2007,
Lawrence Wilkerson, speaking on National Public Radio, proposed impeaching
President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Wilkerson is a Retired Army
Colonel, the former Chief of Staff at the State Department from 2002 to 2005
under then Secretary of State Colin Powell, a Vietnam War veteran, the former
Acting Director of the Marine Corps War College at Quantico, and currently a
teacher of national security at William and Mary College. The program, On Point, was hosted
by Tom Ashbrook, who focused the discussion on a need for greater public
accountability for the Iraq War, but who maintained that the public was not
outraged or interested. (Ashbrook should read some polls and invite on
organizers of the impeachment movement.) Also on the program was Ken
Adelman, who promoted the war and said it would be "a cakewalk".
Adelman argued a case for not holding public officials accountable. Wilkerson said in early comments
on the show: "This administration doesn't know how to effect
accountability in my opinion." But he did not raise the possibility of
impeachment until after a member of the audience had phoned in. The first caller who was put on
the air demanded an investigation of the lies that launched the war, and
asked for accountability "all the way up." In response to Adelman's
claims that history would hold people accountable, the caller said "I
would love to have a job where, worst case scenario, my historical record is
flawed." Ashbrook framed the question in
terms of alleged limitations of the U.S. political system, and Wilkerson
replied: "Well I do think that that's a reality of our system. However,
let me back up just a minute and say that I really do think that our founding
fathers, Hamilton, Washington, Monroe, Madison, would all be astounded that
over the course of our short history as a country, 200 plus years, we haven't
used that little two to three lines in Article II of the Constitution more
frequently, the impeachment clause. I do believe that they would have thought
had they been asked by you or whomever at the time of the Constitutional
Convention in Philadelphia 'Do you think this will be exercised?' they would
have said 'Of course it will, every generation they'll have to throw some
bastard out'. That's a form of accountability too. It's ultimate
accountability." After an interruption, Wilkerson
continued: "The language in that article, the language in those two or
three lines about impeachment is nice and precise - it's high crimes and
misdemeanors. You compare Bill Clinton's peccadilloes for which he was
impeached to George Bush's high crimes and misdemeanors or Dick Cheney's high
crimes and misdemeanors, and I think they pale in significance." Ashbrook asked for some examples
of such high crimes and misdemeanors, and Wilkerson replied: "I think
that the caller was right. I think we went into this war for specious
reasons. I think we went into this war not too much unlike the way we went
into the Spanish American War with the Hearst press essentially goading the
American people and the leadership into war. That was a different time in a
different culture, in a different America. We're in a very different place
today and I think we essentially got goaded into the war through some of the
same means." ------- Jump to
today's Truthout Features: (In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t
has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r
u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) "Go
to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and
allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are
often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may
not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to
Original" links. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
| t r
u t h o u t | issues | environment | labor | women | health | voter rights | multimedia | donate | contact | subscribe | about
us |
||
|
Murtha:
Dems could impeach |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
“What I’m saying, there’s four ways to influence a president.
And one of them’s impeachment,” Murtha, chairman of the House Appropriations
defense subcommittee, said on CBS’ “Face
the Nation.” Murtha has been one of the most outspoken members of Congress on
the administration's handling of the war in Iraq; others who have strongly
criticized Bush have stopped short of calling for impeachment. Murtha also expressed doubt that Congress and the Bush
administration would be able to work out a compromise soon in
negotiations on the $124 billion war spending bill. Congress' emergency
funding measure contains a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S.
combat troops from Iraq. “They say we’re willing to compromise, and then we don’t get any
compromise,” said Murtha. “We’ve already compromised. And we need to make
this president understand, Mr. President, the public has spoken.”
Politico.com is co-host of
the Republican presidential debate on May 3rd, and candidates will be
answering our readers’ favorite questions.
Murtha said the Democratic-controlled Congress will pass another
war funding bill with similar benchmarks for progress in Iraq after President
Bush vetoes the legislation, as he has vowed to do. “If he vetoes this bill, he’s cut off the money. But obviously,
we’re going to pass another bill,” Murtha said. “It’s going to have some
stringent requirements. ... I'd like to look at this again in two months.” Rice on the Defensive Meanwhile, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice appeared on
several Sunday shows to defend the administration’s opposition to the
emergency wartime funding bill with the troop withdrawal timetable. “The president has said he will not accept anything that
constitutes a timetable for American withdrawal,” Rice said on
ABC’s “This Week.” On “Face the Nation,” she also said: “To begin
now to tie our own hands and to say we must do this if they don’t do that
doesn’t allow us the flexibility and creativity that we need to move this
forward.” Rice also said she would resist a subpoena from Rep. Henry A.
Waxman (D-Calif.) to testify about the administration’s prewar claims
that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Waxman is chairman of the
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. “I’m perfectly willing to answer whatever questions Chairman
Waxman has,” Rice said. “But … there’s a constitutional issue here that the
White House will have to handle.” Meanwhile, on ABC, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) sharply attacked
Rice and the administration’s position on Iraq. Sen. Sam Brownback (Kan.), a Republican presidential candidate,
responded: “This is assured defeat. Defeat will happen in America, not
in Iraq. That’s not what the American people want.” |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CONG.
DENNIS KUCINICH
The link following is a video of Cong. Kucinich asking a
very important question and suggesting_ _The time is now._
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAIJyKhJhiM
Impeach
Cheney First?
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=187164
Despite House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's efforts to convince Democrats to keep
presidential accountability "off the table," Kucinich is just one of
many House Democrats who have acknowledged in recent days that they are hearing
the call for action loud and clear from their constituents and from grassroots
activists across the country.
"I get one call after another saying, 'Impeach the president,'"
says Congressman John Murtha, D-Pennsylvania. Congresswoman Diane Watson,
D-California, says constituents in Los Angeles "are saying impeachment. I
am hearing that more and more and more."
Kucinich, for his part, has sent more signals than anyone else in the caucus
about his interest in raising accountability issues. The congressman, who has
broken with Pelosi on issues relating to the funding of the war in Iraq, has
been blunt about his frustration with the caution of Congress when it comes to
addressing executive excess.
Spread this far and wide:
Kucinich Introduces Historic Articles of Impeachment Against
Vice President Richard Cheney
Documents:
http://kucinich.house.gov/SpotlightIssues/documents.htm
Go here to call/email your Representatives:
http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.shtml
Ladies and gentlemen, your tireless efforts for impeachment
have finally borne fruit. Your countless emails, calls, letters, town hall
meetings, street protests, and huge marches have persuaded one courageous
Member of Congress to start the impeachment process.
That Member is Dennis Kucinich, and here are his Articles of
Impeachment, officially known as H.Res. 333. In a nutshell, Kucinich believes Cheney should be impeached because
he:
1. Manipulated
intelligence to fabricate a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
2. Manipulated
intelligence to fabricate a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda
3. Openly threatened
aggression against Iran absent any real threat to the the United States Let's
show our support for Kucinich's heroic efforts by asking the rest of Congress
to co-sponsor these Articles , and by telling the
media we demand impeachment now.
Ask your Congress Member to support impeachment proceedings
against Vice President Cheney: http://tinyurl.com/yttnxq
Ask members of the House Judiciary Committee and Speaker
Nancy Pelosi to lead, follow, or get out of the way:
Tell the media that you support Kucinich's proposal to begin
impeachment proceedings: http://tinyurl.com/2cag7t
Learn more at: http://www.impeachcheney.org
It's Time to Poll on Impeachment
After the Downing Street Memos proved George Bush lied about
Iraq's WMDs, Democrats.com began lobbying corporate media polling organizations
to include impeachment questions in their polls. For two years, those pollsters
have contemptuously dismissed our requests. But
now that Rep. Dennis Kucinich has introduced Articles of
Impeachment for Dick Cheney, it is time for pollsters to include impeachment
questions in every poll they take . You can ask them to here: http://tinyurl.com/ys4yax
Public to Demand Impeachment at Capitol on Wednesday
VERMONT STATE FOR IMPEACHMENT
Great news! In addition to the 39 Vermont cities that passed
Impeachment Resolutions, today the Vermont State Senate passed such a
resolution! This is the first state house to pass one, so this action could
really elevate the debate.
http://wjz.com/topstories/topstories_story_110100239.html
Here are two interesting stories about impeachment this
week.
Today, Kucinch has filed articles of impeachment of Richard
Cheney, and investigations of Cheney would surely drag Bush down as well.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2007/04/articles_of_impeachment_to_be.html
The second story is about Medea Benjamin and dozens of other
influential politicians, artists, activists and academics calling for
impeachment at the capitol this Thursday!
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0704/S00240.htm
Abel
PETITION
FOR IMPEACHMENT of PRESIDENT BUSH and VICE-PRESIDENT CHENEY
TO: SENATORS LINCOLN AND PRYOR and REPRESENTATIVE BOOZMAN
Here is an abridged list of Charges for Impeachment and here
is the link to extensive evidence: http://www.impeachforpeace.org/evidence/ At least eight books have been published
advocating the impeachment of President Bush.
Charges:
ILLEGAL WAR
George W. Bush intentionally misled the Congress and the
public regarding the threat from Iraq in order to justify a war against Iraq,
intentionally conspired with others to defraud the United States in connection
with the war against Iraq in violation of Title 18 United States Code, Section
371;
ILLEGAL SPYING
*Update - Recently Found Guilty by District Court
George W. Bush has admitted to ordering the National
Security Agency to conduct electronic surveillance of American civilians
without seeking warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of
Review, duly constituted by Congress in 1978, in violation of Title 50 United
States Code, Section 1805;
GENEVA CONVENTION VIOLATIONS
*Update -Found Guilty by the Federal Supreme Court
George W. Bush conspired to commit the torture of prisoners
in violation of the "Federal Torture Act" Title 18 United States
Code, Section 113C, the UN Torture Convention and the Geneva Convention, which
under Article VI of the Constitution are part of the "supreme Law of the
Land;"
George W. Bush conspired to deny due process to prisoners of
war, indiscriminantly bomb cities, transfer prisoners of war from an occupied
territory, and planned, prepared, initiated and waged of a war of aggression in
violation of U.S. Military Code section 2441, Geneva convention (I Art 3, II
Art 18, Art 19, III Art 13, Art 17, Art 33, Art 34, Art 49, IV Art 3), and the
1945 Nuremberg Principles articles 6(a) and (b);
ILLEGAL DETENTION
*Update - Found Guilty by District Court
George W. Bush has acted to strip Americans of their
constitutional rights by ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without
access to legal counsel, without charge and without opportunity to appear
before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the
discretionary designation by the President of a U.S. citizen as an "enemy
combatant," all in subversion of law;
ILLEGAL RELEASE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION
George W. Bush authorized the leaking classified national
secrets to further a political agenda, exposing an unknown number of covert U.
S. intelligence agents to potential harm and retribution while simultaneously
refusing to investigate the matter;
ILLEGAL FREEZING OF ACCOUNTS AND RESTRICTION TO FREEDOM OF
ASSEMBLY *Update - Found Guilty by District Court
George W. Bush ordered the freezing of financial accounts,
without limit to how groups were chosen to be on such a list, and he ordered
himself the power to create blacklists of any individual he felt was associated
with the aforementioned groups, thereby creating a system of "guilt by
association."
ILLEGAL USE OF SIGNING STATEMENTS
George Walker Bush has attached signing statements to more
than one hundred bills before signing them, within which he has made over
eleven hundred challenges to provisions of laws passed by Congress, a figure
that exceeds the total number of such challenges by all previous presidents
combined, and has used this practice to exempt himself, as President of the
United States, from enforcing or from being held accountable to provisions of
the said laws. By declining to veto even bills, and instead attaching signing
statements challenging hundreds of laws passed by Congress, he has sought to
exempt the executive branch from accountability to said laws, thereby violating
Article 1, Section 7 and Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution. These
articles of the Constitution dictate that the president has the option of
signing or vetoing a bill, and upon signing the bill to "take care that
the laws be faithfully executed."
NAME (PRINTED)
MAILING ADDRESS
FROM ABEL
Here are some typical arguments against impeachment and some
good rebuttals if you are interested.
Abel
Arguments Against Bush Impeachment...
• If we impeach Bush, we’ll get President Cheney!
The most recent impeachment resolution introduced by
McKinney included Bush, Cheney, and Rice. Although, even if we only initially
pursue Bush, initiating the impeachment process will lead to an investigation
that will implicate lots of people in the Bush administration who are guilty of
committing crimes, including Cheney.
In addition, no matter who we get to replace Bush, we’ll be
showing those in power that anyone who breaks the law will be held accountable.
• Promoting impeachment will seem too “extreme.”
Demanding that crimes be investigated is NOT extreme. Some
previous impeachment attempts were considered extreme because they were pursued
for actions that didn't rise to the level of a Constitutional crisis, which is
what the impeachment tool is meant to be used for. Nixon's impeachment,
however, was bipartisan.
•
We should wait to impeach...
Wait to impeach? We've waited 3 or more years too long
already. We had enough evidence to impeach years ago. Remember, an impeachment
only means you have enough evidence to warrant a trial, just like an
indictment. Our congress people didn't take an oath to bipartisanship. They
took an oath to the Constitution. Besides which, our troops, Iraqi civilians,
and our own civil liberties are all waiting for this.
• Before we impeach, we should get some legislation
passed...
And with unconstitutional Presidential Signing Statements,
veto power, and the power of "Commander in Chief" at his disposal,
how do you think Congress is going to get anything accomplished without first
impeaching Bush?
If your tire blows while you're driving, do you stop to fix
it? Or do you continue driving on your rim because to stop would take too much
time?
• It hurts the democracy to go through a presidential
impeachment. And Bush is a lame duck anyway.
Holding government officials accountable for their actions
strengthens our democracy. Letting lawlessness stand weakens it.
Sometimes reprimanding a child (president) doesn't make the
family (Washington) a happy place. But you still have to do it so the child and
his siblings (future presidents) learn about accountability. Impeachment is
horribly UNDERUSED, which is part of why there's so much corruption at the top.
Politicians must learn to fear it. People think things are better because we
improved the make-up of our law-making body, Congress. But Bush is BREAKING
LAWS. So, it doesn't matter how many laws Congress passes if they don't serve
their OVERSIGHT duties as well by impeaching. They swore to defend the
Constitution. What are laws without enforcement?
Besides, Bush can still do a lot of damage. Our troops,
Iran, and our Supreme Court are all endangered so long as he remains in office.
Waiting until Bush is out of office will leave us complicit in any further
crimes he commits. The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated that the
death toll from a "tactical" nuclear weapon of the kind Bush is
contemplating using in Iran would be at minimum 3 million men, women, and
children. The path of death would stretch across country boundaries into India.
Perhaps worst of all, we set a terrible precedent by
allowing Bush to stay in office after he's broken so many laws. Impeachment
will stop future presidents from using Bush's actions as justification for even
more lawbreaking and erosion of civil liberties.
• I'm a Democrat/Republican. If we support
impeachment it will lower the chances of my party winning in 2008.
So, your party would rather win elections than do what's
right for the country? I hope you're wrong. I also hope the public is willing
to throw additional support to any party that holds our elected officials
accountable for their actions. This has been historically true with every
single impeachment effort launched. And this impeachment effort would begin
with majority support (unlike most past impeachments including Nixon).
• Impeachment will never happen. The Republicans will
block it.
Well, all we need is a majority of support in the House. And
2/3rds vote in the Senate to remove Bush from office will happen once the
evidence gets aired on the floor of the House, and subsequently the national
media outlets. The political pressure will become too great.
Today's impossibility is tomorrow's reality. Republican
Congress members will realize that tying their political future to Bush reduces
their chances of getting elected. Remember, one way or another, Bush is gone by
2009—
but members of Congress may retain their offices beyond that date. Bush's poll
numbers are extremely low, and most Americans support impeachment. This is a
bipartisan movement. This means that if we make the pressure unbearable for
Members of Congress, they'll turn on him to keep their own seats (like they did
with Nixon). It's already starting to happen. While many Members of Congress
have behaved unethically in the last few years, it's important to understand
that this is related to their warped view of what's in their self-interest. Let's
wake them up to their true self-interest (impeaching the president), by showing
them our support for impeachment.
And even if we only impeach, and the Senate fails to do
their duty and remove him from office, it will only implicate the Senators who
fail to do their sworn Constitutional duty.
• But Speaker of the House Pelosi said that
Impeachment was "off the table."
Pelosi most likely said this to remove any appearance of
conflict-of-interest that would arise if she were thrust into the presidency as
a result of the coming impeachment. What we need to do is to pressure Pelosi
not to interfere with impeachment maneuverings within her party. Sending her
Do-It-Yourself impeachments legitimizes her when she joins the impeachment
movement in the future.
FROM ABEL
Here are some typical arguments against impeachment and some
good rebuttals if you are interested.
Abel
Arguments Against Bush Impeachment...
• If we impeach Bush, we’ll get President Cheney!
The most recent impeachment resolution introduced by
McKinney included Bush, Cheney, and Rice. Although, even if we only initially
pursue Bush, initiating the impeachment process will lead to an investigation
that will implicate lots of people in the Bush administration who are guilty of
committing crimes, including Cheney.
In addition, no matter who we get to replace Bush, we’ll be
showing those in power that anyone who breaks the law will be held accountable.
• Promoting impeachment will seem too “extreme.”
Demanding that crimes be investigated is NOT extreme. Some
previous impeachment attempts were considered extreme because they were pursued
for actions that didn't rise to the level of a Constitutional crisis, which is
what the impeachment tool is meant to be used for. Nixon's impeachment,
however, was bipartisan.
•
We should wait to impeach...
Wait to impeach? We've waited 3 or more years too long
already. We had enough evidence to impeach years ago. Remember, an impeachment
only means you have enough evidence to warrant a trial, just like an
indictment. Our congress people didn't take an oath to bipartisanship. They
took an oath to the Constitution. Besides which, our troops, Iraqi civilians,
and our own civil liberties are all waiting for this.
• Before we impeach, we should get some legislation
passed...
And with unconstitutional Presidential Signing Statements,
veto power, and the power of "Commander in Chief" at his disposal,
how do you think Congress is going to get anything accomplished without first
impeaching Bush?
If your tire blows while you're driving, do you stop to fix
it? Or do you continue driving on your rim because to stop would take too much
time?
• It hurts the democracy to go through a presidential
impeachment. And Bush is a lame duck anyway.
Holding government officials accountable for their actions
strengthens our democracy. Letting lawlessness stand weakens it.
Sometimes reprimanding a child (president) doesn't make the
family (Washington) a happy place. But you still have to do it so the child and
his siblings (future presidents) learn about accountability. Impeachment is
horribly UNDERUSED, which is part of why there's so much corruption at the top.
Politicians must learn to fear it. People think things are better because we
improved the make-up of our law-making body, Congress. But Bush is BREAKING
LAWS. So, it doesn't matter how many laws Congress passes if they don't serve
their OVERSIGHT duties as well by impeaching. They swore to defend the
Constitution. What are laws without enforcement?
Besides, Bush can still do a lot of damage. Our troops,
Iran, and our Supreme Court are all endangered so long as he remains in office.
Waiting until Bush is out of office will leave us complicit in any further
crimes he commits. The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated that the
death toll from a "tactical" nuclear weapon of the kind Bush is
contemplating using in Iran would be at minimum 3 million men, women, and
children. The path of death would stretch across country boundaries into India.
Perhaps worst of all, we set a terrible precedent by
allowing Bush to stay in office after he's broken so many laws. Impeachment
will stop future presidents from using Bush's actions as justification for even
more lawbreaking and erosion of civil liberties.
• I'm a Democrat/Republican. If we support
impeachment it will lower the chances of my party winning in 2008.
So, your party would rather win elections than do what's
right for the country? I hope you're wrong. I also hope the public is willing
to throw additional support to any party that holds our elected officials
accountable for their actions. This has been historically true with every
single impeachment effort launched. And this impeachment effort would begin
with majority support (unlike most past impeachments including Nixon).
• Impeachment will never happen. The Republicans will
block it.
Well, all we need is a majority of support in the House. And
2/3rds vote in the Senate to remove Bush from office will happen once the
evidence gets aired on the floor of the House, and subsequently the national
media outlets. The political pressure will become too great.
Today's impossibility is tomorrow's reality. Republican
Congress members will realize that tying their political future to Bush reduces
their chances of getting elected. Remember, one way or another, Bush is gone by
2009—
but members of Congress may retain their offices beyond that date. Bush's poll
numbers are extremely low, and most Americans support impeachment. This is a
bipartisan movement. This means that if we make the pressure unbearable for
Members of Congress, they'll turn on him to keep their own seats (like they did
with Nixon). It's already starting to happen. While many Members of Congress
have behaved unethically in the last few years, it's important to understand
that this is related to their warped view of what's in their self-interest. Let's
wake them up to their true self-interest (impeaching the president), by showing
them our support for impeachment.
And even if we only impeach, and the Senate fails to do
their duty and remove him from office, it will only implicate the Senators who
fail to do their sworn Constitutional duty.
• But Speaker of the House Pelosi said that
Impeachment was "off the table."
Pelosi most likely said this to remove any appearance of
conflict-of-interest that would arise if she were thrust into the presidency as
a result of the coming impeachment. What we need to do is to pressure Pelosi
not to interfere with impeachment maneuverings within her party. Sending her
Do-It-Yourself impeachments legitimizes her when she joins the impeachment
movement in the future.
FROM ABEL
Violations of law (impeachable offenses)
•Manipulation of intelligence to justify an illegal
invasion and occupation
•Lying to America about Iraq’s posing an imminent
threat, WMDs and links to 9/11
•Initiation of a war of aggression, highest violation
of Nuremberg Charter
•Authorizing torture, international war crime
•Warrantless wiretapping of US citizens
•Violated numerous Constitutional rights of US
citizen
•Facilitation and support of war profiteering
•Gross criminal negligence in addressing the
aftermath of Katrina and climate change
Crucial Facts
•Over 3,000 soldiers dead and over 20,000 wounded
•655,000 Iraqis dead and countless more wounded
•War will ultimately cost over $2 trillion www.csmonitor.com/2006/0110/dailyUpdate.html
•national debt increasing $4-600 billion/yr. to the
current $8.7 trillion total
•Bush Tax Cuts will cost $4.3 Trillion by 2016
The Nation (Feb. 5, 2007), “For the Republic”:
“…investigations that could lead to impeachment may, as one ingredient of
Congress’s activity, strengthen rather than weaken the efforts to end the
war. Investigations, resolutions,
legislation, not to mention citizen action, can all find their place as part of
the common effort.”
From Rachel News Feb. 22, 2007Editorial: Making Martial Law Easier
As we have pointed out before, the U.S. now has all the trappings
of a police state, though for the most part it is not yet being operated as one. Nevertheless, even the New York Times has noticed that we are inching toward martial law. “Culture
of Obedience”
SALT LAKE
CITY Rocky Anderson may not be the most
liberal mayor in America. But here in the most conservative state, he might as
well be.
Just
being himself is enough to galvanize, divide or enrage people who have followed
his career as Salt Lake City’s mayor, and who are now watching him become, in
the twilight of his final term, a national spokesman for the excoriation and
impeachment of President Bush.
[“President Bush is a war criminal,” Mr. Anderson, a
Democrat, said at a rally here on Monday marking the fourth anniversary of the
war in Iraq. “Let impeachment be the first step toward national reconciliation
and toward penance for the outrages committed in our nation’s name.”]
Mr. Anderson, a 55-year-old
lapsed Mormon and former civil litigator with a rich baritone and a mane of
patrician-silver hair, is no stranger to strong talk and political stances that
leave his audiences breathless with exasperation, admiration or sometimes a
mixture of both.
Theres a
real resistance to change and an almost pathological devotion to leaders simply
because theyre leaders, he said, in describing fellow Utahans who do not share
his views and who in large numbers support the president (and gave him 72
percent of their vote in 2004). Theres a dangerous culture of obedience
throughout much of this country thats worse in Utah than anywhere.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/22/us/22rocky.html?hp
Monday, February
26, 2007
Organizing Notes
WE HAVE BECOME
DEATH
The U.S. now has more firepower stationed in the Persian
Gulf than at any time since the beginning of the Iraq war.
The photo above is the crew of the USS Eisenhower which is today on alert in
the Arabian Sea.
Last night before going to bed I read the latest article by Seymour Hersch at
the New Yorker magazine on U.S. plans for Iran. I now have absolutely
no doubt that Busy-Cheney will attack Iran along with Israel.
But even more so the article clearly spells out the larger plans to widen the
war in the region by funding Sunni terrorist groups in Lebanon, Syria and Iran
to create more turmoil in those Shiite dominated nations. The plan is to create
an Iraq-style civil war between Sunni and Shiite throughout the Middle East in
hopes the U.S. can then divide and conquer the entire region.
Just like the crew member in the photo above, with the very sick death mask on
his face, the U.S. is now without a doubt the leading death agent on the
planet. Our foreign policy is war and death. And the fact that the weapons
corporations can make a substantial profit at it - all the better they say.
This is worse than Hitler. This is the most horrendous display of evil that one
can imagine.
According to Hersch, the Bush-Cheney cabal have asked Saudia Arabia to fund
Sunni terrorist groups to go into these Shiite countries and create civil war.
These are the same Sunni groups that are killing American GI's right now in
Iraq. Do you see the insanity here?
You must do something immediately. You have to get people to read and publicly
discuss this article by Seymour Hersch linked here. http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/022507Z.shtml
People must come to grips immediately with the pure evil of
current U.S. plans for endless war in the Middle East.
We are in big trouble at this moment.
Get busy.
Bruce K. Gagnon
Coordinator
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com
(our blog)
APRIL
30, 2007, RALLY TO IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY, UOFA CAMPUS, organized by Abel Tomlinson.
Songs by DONNA STJERNA AND KELLY MULHOLLAN
SONG BY DAN DEAN
Dr
Bennett,
Here are the lyrics to my song, Intolerable Acts, along with
a brief "preamble" I presented before I played. Feel free to edit for length or content. The song is also available for listening or
download online at:
http://www.purevolume.com/dandean
Thanks for all you do,
Dan
I'm always pleased to see my fellow citizens exercise their
constitutionally protected right to peaceful assembly and free speech. As many of you probably are, I am disturbed
to see a perfectly natural feeling like patriotism, a love of one's country, be
manipulated (as it has throughout
history) to drum up support for another war for profit. In 1774, King George's British Parliament
passed five laws which American colonists called "Intolerable Acts,"
including one prohibiting town meetings.
Resistance to these acts eventually brought about our country's first
"regime change." I know I'm
fortunate to live in this country, but I can't ignore the terrible things for
which our government is responsible – slavery, genocide, unilateral invasions
of sovereign nations, being the only nation to ever use a weapon of mass
destruction - the list goes on. This
song is about the disconnect between the America we want to see, the one
envisioned by those who designed our government, and the America we have created
– the potential lauded in songs and poems, and the unfortunate reality of our
collective history.
intolerable acts
oh say can't you see by the rockets' red glare the
collateral damage – bombs bursting in air somehow i don't think everyone saw
what i saw our government is waging a war without end asking "how did our
oil get under their sand?"
i guess what i'm feeling is shock,
because it sure isn't awe
it's time to reread that u.s. constitution reclaim old glory
as the symbol of revolution that it was back when our forefathers and mothers
expressed their dissent we the people need the power, not the corporations who
could stand to improve their reputations i hold these truths to be self-evident
these are intolerable acts
oh beautiful and spacious skies
where the smog stained flag of convenience flies where
profiteers prosper and put on those patriot acts oh purple mountain majesty
with its peak mined away and its rivers of mercury oh leaders of nations who
refuse to listen to the facts
when in the course of human events
it becomes clear our leaders don't have common sense it's
the duty of all true patriot souls to protest just like back in seventeen
seventy six when the people got tired of old george's tricks the extent of our
love for our country is put to the test
we live in the land of the free and the home of the brave
the country that was built on the backs of the slaves the land where my fathers
died – land of the pilgrim's pride land of the natives who suffered our
genocide one nation under god in whom we're told to trust but if you worship
another we'll bomb you to dust when millions of people around the world
disagree yet we refuse to rethink our priorities...
it's time to reread that u.s. constitution reclaim old glory
as the symbol of revolution that it was back when our forefathers and mothers
expressed their dissent we the people need the power, not the corporations who
could stand to improve their reputations i hold these truths to be self-evident
these are intolerable acts
POEM
BY RUSS (I never received Russ’s poem)
SPEECH
BY ABEL TOMLINSON
Impeach for Peace Rally Speech
Hello everybody! I’m
sincerely sorry Medea Benjamin couldn’t make it, she was offered a meeting with
Hugo Chavez who had the balls to call Bush the Devil at the UN, but that’s o.k.
I‘d like to thank everyone here for showing up to participate in this
courageous expression of patriotic dissent.
Thanks to everyone who helped organize this event, thanks to OMNI for
their support, and great thanks to the wonderful musicians and poets here
today!
Now let’s get to the point.
We must impeach our criminal
leaders! George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney!
Why impeach? We could
spend all day listing the crimes including any of the 34 scandals during Bush’s
first term, but instead I’ll focus solely on the highest crimes. Briefly, the charges are manipulating
intelligence and lying about Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction and ties to 911
to justify their illegal war of aggression; they conducted warrantless spying
of our computers and telephones; they authorized torture; illegal detainments
that violate several Constitutional laws; and illegal use of signing statements
to over 100 Congressional laws, allowing escapement from accountability with a
telling example from McCain’s anti-torture bill, which pegged Bush’s
pro-torture views. The US Supreme Court
and District Courts have already found the Administration guilty of most of
these charges.
Bush and Cheney are guilty of the most serious international
war crimes by conducting a “war of aggression” and committing a “grave breach”
of the Geneva Conventions with authorization of torture.
The most glaring impeachable offense is their lies to the American People about
Iraq’s posing an imminent threat, Weapons of Mass Destruction and links to the
9/11 attacks.
Evidence clearly indicates intentional manipulation of
pre-war intelligence to gather public support for war. The top secret Downing
Street memo clearly states that “intelligence and facts were being fixed”
regarding WMDs in order to justify the Iraq Invasion. We also know that most of the intelligence
sources used such as “Curveball” and others were known to lack credibility by
many intelligence experts, but critics were silenced.
Last night on 60 Minutes, former CIA director George Tenet
stated forcefully that those in the
CIA knew for a fact that Iraq had no
connection to 9/11, but Bush and Cheney ignored the CIA and lied to America and
the World. Even today, there is a
significant percentage of dumb American’s who still believe this lie, mostly
Fox News viewers.
Unfortunately, many Americans are also uninformed about the actual support for
impeachment. Let’s thank all of the media for this, not just Fox News. There is a serious suppression of impeachment
polling or news stories related to impeachment by all mass media. Washington Post chief pollster Richard Morin
was asked about lack of impeachment polling and he responded, “this question
makes me angry”. The director of Gallup Poll also said he would only do
impeachment polls if the issue gained mainstream attention. Uuuuh…duhhh, what the hell does he think
creates mainstream attention on such issues, perhaps polls and media coverage
of them.
The last impeachment poll was from Newsweek in October
2006. This poll found that 51% of
Americans support impeachment, and even 20% of Republicans, so we are not just
a majority, but a bipartisan majority! Sadly, Newsweek did their best to hide this
fact even in their own report and all other mass media followed suit. Likewise, there have been no new impeachment
polls since the Democrats won both houses of congress in November. The whole situation seems very fishy at
best. Shit, by now 60% of America could
support impeachment.
Not only do the majority of Americans support impeachment,
but many major cities and 5 states introduced measures supporting
impeachment. In addition, 39 Vermont
cities and the Vermont State Senate recently passed impeachment resolutions,
which have greatly elevated the level of debate nationwide.
Also, the tremendous Congressman and Presidential Candidate
Dennis Kucinich has just introduced articles of impeachment against Dick Cheney
in the US House of Representatives with the idea that Bush would be easily
co-ensnared with investigations into the well-known crimes.
Likewise, we recently started this new student RSO Impeach
for Peace UA a couple weeks ago and we already have nearly 100 members. Our objectives are simple: to raise awareness
about impeachment at such events and to pass impeachment resolutions on campus
and in the City of Fayetteville. We
could be a shining example for the Red State South and we could show the rest
of the country that we’re not all inbred Rush Limbaugh-Fox News zombies.
There were also nationwide protests in dozens of cities this
Saturday, April 28th. All of
this impeachment activity was summarized nicely by former Attorney General
Ramsey Clark when he recently said, “The
Winds of Impeachment are Sweeping the Nation”.
Now let’s talk briefly about the arguments against
impeachment. Most of the arguments are
very weak, but two are worth rebutting.
The first is that impeachment will distract from Iraq
Withdrawal. This argument is weak
because Bush has promised to veto withdrawal bills and with his illegal use of
signing statements, he could negate any bill even if he signed it, so I hate to
burst the bubble, but we’re probably staying in Iraq until Bush is out of
office, so why not accelerate his departure with impeachment? Impeachment may be the only option to end
the War soon.
The other argument I wish to rebut was mentioned by Barbara
Walters last week on the View.
Impeachment was being discussed and the four women seemed to reflect
America’s support for impeachment. The
ditzy conservative, Elizabeth was against impeachment and the two more liberal
women, Rosy and Joy supported impeachment.
Barbara Walters, the moderate one, said she didn’t support impeachment
because it would tie up business in Congress.
Please allow me to rebut Barbara! Has our congress really got shit done since
Bush has ruled as supreme leader? The
vast majority of accomplishments were wrong at best and evil at worst, with
most legislation aimed at helping the wealthiest 10% of Americans and
Corporations. So hell yeah, Let’s
tie them up until we get a new president!
Furthermore, one of the priorities on Bush’s Agenda is arguably to
invade Iran, so again let’s impeach to prevent further atrocities. No business
is better than bad business.
The Primary purpose of impeachment is not simply punitive
justice for our criminal leaders, but more importantly in regaining the world’s
respect and setting an example for future Presidents. We must impeach to exemplify democratic
accountability and that it is wrong to wiretap, torture, and manipulate
intelligence and lie to justify an illegal war.
Regarding global respect, many people now see the billboard
of America as the tarnished arrogant image of Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, and illegal
Iraq War. Even Colin Powell said America
is losing it’s moral authority. We’re
also losing diplomatic credibility and persuasive power. How are we supposed to encourage democracy
and human rights in China, Russia or Israel, when our moral voice rings
hollow. When we criticize them for
unfair elections or human rights abuses, they can say, “eat shit” you rig elections and illegally wiretap, imprison and
torture people, so why can’t we?
If we don’t impeach our criminal “leaders”, we’ll continue
sending a message to the rest of the world that we’ve completely abandoned our
respect for the rule of law. If America, the shining example of democracy,
abandons the abiding of our own laws, then other countries will begin to follow
our corrosive example, until we become a world of lawlessness with a reversal
of societal evolution back to the Dark Ages.
Let’s impeach to show the world that this is not King George’s America
and we’re not his sheepish lockstep followers.
But we mustn’t simply impeach Bush because he’ll only be
replaced by another Bushclone like Cheney. We must impeach ‘em all and let God
sort ‘em out. For the past 6 years, an assload of neocons has been constipating
progress and staining the walls of the white house with blood and greedy
corruption. It is time to cleanse and
purge, like a grand enema of justice flushing out this stinky rotting fecal
matter from the highest offices of our government. Let’s patriotically create a
brighter and better America than we’ve ever had, a country of peace and justice
that we can proudly deliver to our children and the next generation of
Americans.
Impeach Now! Impeach Now! Impeach Now!
CONTACT YOUR
CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES
--Senator
Blanche Lincoln: Web Site (they have contact links): www.lincoln.senate.gov; http://www.lincoln.senate.gov/index.cfm;
http://www.lincoln.senate.gov/webform.html
Washington Office: 355 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington,
D.C. 20510-0404
Phone:
(202) 224-4843 Fax: (202) 228-1371.
Fayetteville
office: 251-1380. Lincoln’s
staff is better informed than Boozman’s (see below), but obviously (her vote to
join Bush in appropriating $95 billion more to keep the occupation going) they
need a lot of education.
Northwestern Regional Office
4 South College Avenue, Suite 205,
Google Maps puts the marker 308 feet south of Meadow Street.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 251-1224; FAX (479) 251-1410
Community Affairs Specialist: John Hicks
State Central Office
912 West Fourth Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
TEL: (501) 375-2993
FAX: (501) 375-7064
Donna Kay Yeargan
State Director
Community Affairs Specialist: Tamika S. Edwards and Kim Mullen
Cydney Pearce
Office Manager\Special Projects Coordinator
Cathy Bozynski
State Scheduler and Caseworker (Passports, Post Office, and Railroad
Retirement)
State Staff
Shelly Baron,
Constituent Relations Specialist
Margie Goss
Staff Assistant
Mary Anderson
Caseworker (Education, EEOC, Health Insurance, Housing, IRS, Labor, OPM, Small
Business, and Workers' Compensation)
Betty Ruth Davis
Caseworker (FEMA, Medicare, and Social Security)
Cynthia Edwards
Caseworker (Corps of Engineers, FCC, Farm Services, Fish and Wildlife,
Forestry, Justice, Natural Resources, Parks, Prisons (State), Rural
Development, Veterans, and USDA)
Rod Sweetman
Arkansas Military Liaison\Caseworker (Academy Appointments, Immigration,
Military, Prisons (Federal), and Veterans) Staff
members:
Getting to her
office:
--Senator
Mark Pryor: Web Site (see contact
link): www.pryor.senate.gov ; http://pryor.senate.gov/contact/ Pryor has no office in NWA, so call or write
him and his staff in DC: Washington Office: 217 Russell Senate Office
Building Washington, D.C. 20510-0403. Phone: (202) 224-2353 Fax: (202) 228-0908
Main District Office: 500 Pres. Clinton Ave., Suite 401, Little
Rock, AR 72201.
Phone: (501)
324-6336 Fax: (501) 324-5320.
--Congressman
John Boozman, District 3, 12 counties from Benton
to Washington
Lowell office:
479-725-0400. 213 W. Monroe, Suite K, 72745. Boozman's new office
in Lowell is located at 213 West Monroe in Lowell between I 540 and Business
71. Go there, talk to Boozman’s staff members. They are all polite young people, but now, made blind and deaf by the
US Corporate/War complex, they need your peaceful explanation of reality and
values. To reach that office take Exit
78 off I - 540 and go east. You will be on Hwy 264 which is also West Monroe.
The office is in the Puppy Creek Plaza, past the McDonald's on the right.
His suite is in the back of the complex to the left. Or write or call. Ms. McClure is Assistant Chief of Staff for the Lowell office, Ms. Breazeal
focuses on gangs, and Ms. Stacy Davis is constituent staff member.
Ft. Smith
office: 479-782-7787; 30 South 6th St. Rm 240, Ft. Smith 72901.
Harrison
office: 870-741-6900; 402 N. Walnut, Suite 210, Harrison 72601.
DC address: 1708
Longworth House Office Bldng., Washington,
DC 20515; 202-225-4301. Leslie Parker, appointments secretary:
202-225-4301. (Or she was, let me
know if it’s now someone else.)
