Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Impeachment Challenge From AlterNet and Readers Write

By Don Hazen, AlterNet. Posted November 17, 2006.


An invitation to support AlterNet's coverage of the impeachment campaign, plus a collection of important reader responses to Tim Dickinson's article 'So You Want to Impeach.'

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Don Hazen

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

    Dear AlterNet Reader,

    Sent packing! That's right. American voters looked at the horrendous mess in Iraq, the crushing of civil liberties, the increasing wage gap, the overheating planet, and the mess in New Orleans, along with other issues, and voted many Republicans and conservatives out of office and out of power.

    American voters said "enough."

    But did they mean it? Or should the American public go further -- and hold Bush and Cheney responsible for war crimes, torture and illegal wiretapping?

    Several things seem clear:

    • The administration "fixed" intelligence to start a war unsanctioned under international law.
    • The president violated the First Amendment by authorizing the NSA to engage in warrantless wiretapping of American citizens.
    • The president authorized torture -- ignoring military law and the Geneva conventions -- which Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy considers "'war crimes' punishable as federal offenses."

    Based upon these allegations and others, many AlterNet readers want to see impeachment proceedings initiated against Bush and Cheney. A grassroots campaign is already well under way.

    Leaders of groups like Code Pink, Progressive Democrats, Veterans for Peace and others have already met in Philadelphia to plan a campaign. Books by Elizabeth Holtzman, John Nichols and others make a strong case for the viability of impeachment.

    Of nearly 400,000 respondents to a recent MSNBC online poll, 87 percent supported impeachment. And a Newsweek poll found that a majority of Americans wanted to see Bush impeached if he lied about the war in Iraq.

    AlterNet wants to provide strong coverage of the grassroots movement to impeach Bush and Cheney.

    Will you make a contribution to help?

    Now is the time when the real battle for progressive values begins in earnest. We need to keep the quality of our content high -- bringing you the best articles, essays and video available.

    AlterNet will:

    • Give you the pros (and the cons) of impeachment.
    • Track the impeachment organizing effort as it gains momentum.
    • Make an ongoing assessment of impeachment's political viability.
    • Continue to provide you the best journalism on the topic, including excerpts from new books and new research on the justification for impeachment.

    But we need your partnership to help us maintain our high standards. Please make a contribution to support AlterNet's coverage right now.

    Help us move forward.

    What follows are some important reader responses from Tim Dickinson's recent article "So You Think You Want to Impeach?."

    Warmly,

    Don Hazen

    ****

    Many AlterNet readers wrote in response to Tim Dickinson's Nov. 15 article, So You Think You Want to Impeach?, about impeachment and the current crop of books on the topic. It seems pretty clear that the AlterNet readers who commented did not appreciate Dickinson's ultimate assessment that politically, impeachment wasn't practical. A slew of angry, idealistic, principled readers came down pretty heavily on the idea that impeachment should be off the table, and are raring to join a grassroots movement in support of impeaching both Bush and Cheney.

    What follows represents the feelings and thoughts of some of these writers -- and many more.

    Joyleaf wrote, "I think some action is in order, and I have this little feeling that weight's shifting in that kind of way that can signal changing tides. A little push from a lot of us could get the show on the road."

    Keefus55: "If impeachment is not an option, then why did our founding fathers put that procedure in our Constitution in the first place? Clearly, this crowd has committed MORE than their fair share of "high crimes and misdemeanors."

    "It seems to me that the unprovoked invasion of another sovereign state in a trumped up war, which has resulted in the needless killing thousands of our own sons and daughters (not to mention hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians) would CERTAINLY beat white stains on a blue dress hands down ..."

    Earthie writes, "It bothers me not at all that many in positions of leadership now speak of impeachment as 'off the table.' This is, after all, government of, for and by 'the people,' which is us. Many seem to want to forget the 'by' part of this reality."

    "We have a few months before the 110th Congress (which will be under a Democratic majority) is sworn in. This means that men of integrity such as Conyers and Waxman will chair key committees charged with oversight of the crimes that we have seen openly committed by Bush and Cheney. We (those of us who believe firmly that impeachment is both warranted and necessary) have those few months to muster and show support for this cause."

    "Remember that Sen. Russ Feingold (my junior senator from Wisconsin, thank you) stood up and called for censure of Bush just a couple of months ago. He was met with resounding silence. The silence of cowardice and complicity rather than reasoned judgement, if you want my opinion, but silence nonetheless. Not very encouraging to those in Congress who might now consider the more severe measure of impeachment."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: impeachment, appeal

Don Hazen is the executive editor of AlterNet.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Now we're talk'n!
Posted by: equidave on Nov 17, 2006 1:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks to Alternet for making it clear that its editorial staff here considers acknowledging reader priorities as important a dynamic in delivering progressive journalism as impartial, investigative reporting.

In anticipation of any criticism to the contrary, I find it fair and understandable that Alternet would make reference to the recent (and not just a little 'spirited') uproar among readers, over Dickinson's case for foregoing impeachment, as an opportunity to ask for financial support for ongoing coverage of this important issue.

I'll definitely find a way to budget-in making a contribution in 2007.


Thanks and keep up the good work.
-DM, Yalta, Ukraine


PS: Was piece from Mother-J just laid in our laps to fire us up? I think, as so many of us hinted, asked and accused there in the attached comments section, its time for you guys to 'come clean'. ;))

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Failure to impeach
Posted by: Wexler on Nov 17, 2006 2:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Impeachment and conviction are two separate parts of the process. The first part of the process requires sufficient evidence of "high crimes and misdemeanors", which in this situation has been made moot by public revelations of those crimes by the Bush Administration. The domestic spying scandal and various breaches of the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution are impeachable and in the public record.

Should the House fail to impeach Bush and Cheney, they would be establishing that lying about your personal sex life as Clinton did is a more serious crime to this nation than violating the US Constitution.

I hardly think this is the precedent we ought to be setting for future administrations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Failure to impeach Posted by: Chappie
» RE: Failure to impeach Posted by: Wexler
Here's the problem
Posted by: HeroesAll on Nov 17, 2006 2:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In anticipation of being the target of a major flame war, here's what I suspect will happen:

1) Due to public demand, the impeachment process begins;
2) Millions of dollars and thousands of man-days are spent;
3) The whole thing turns into the biggest political bunfight since we started walking upright;
4) Bush and Cheney get impeached, and all that righteous anger is satisfied;
5) The Congress and Senate thereby squander a chance to fix some of the more egregious mistakes so nothing much gets done;
6) No-one is really held accountable for any of the major crimes committed by so many of the Bush junta.

I really, honestly, don't get it. Why are y'all hollering for impeachment and ignoring the far more enticing, far more just, prospect of criminal charges? I mean, really, just how does impeachment punish anyone? So they get a black mark on their CV, so fuckin' what?

To those who insist that Bush et al deserve to be held accountable: what better way than in court? And how is a lengthy legislative process that ties up time and money yet doesn't impose any penalties 'holding them accountable'? What about all the other criminals in the Bush administration?

And one important question: is it necessary to impeach before criminal charges are laid? If not, then why not go straight to criminal charges? They're surely justified.

Now here's what I'd like to see happen:

1) Investigations, thorough, into matters, comprehensive. You have to have them anyway, right?
2) Dems lead the charge to act swiftly and decisively to fix some serious, urgent, major problems (Iraq, climate change, the minimum wage, the electoral process, etc);
3) Results of the investigations are thoroughly and honestly publicised so that even a cockroach will understand the enormity of the crimes;
4) Criminal charges are laid and a coupla dozen Bushies are led through the streets in chains. Preferably wearing pink party frocks, high heels, and lipstick. Thence to be taken straight to prison, where I'm sure they'll find a warm prison welcome;
5) Copious reparations to various groups, individuals, and countries, to be made from these guys' own personal fortunes, including their children's inheritances.

I expect a whole lotta flaming on this, but I'd appreciate it if you read my comment thoroughly first. I'm not in favour of giving these dickheads a free pass. I am in favour of really holding them accountable, instead of an expensive farce that just makes you-all feel that they've been held accountable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Here's the problem Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
» RE: Here's the problem Posted by: Zemiti
» RE: Here's the problem Posted by: brad
» here is THE problem! Posted by: zedaker
» RE: Here's the problem Posted by: Roberta_RansleyMatteau
» RE: Here's the problem Posted by: beachpoet
» RE: Here's the problem Posted by: jwg
» Dig deep Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Here's the problem Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Here's the problem Posted by: jimbobuddy
good
Posted by: rsaxto on Nov 17, 2006 2:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
AlterNet has done a good and responsible thing by pushing the impeachment action for it can do more to bring America into compliance with international law and decent governance than any other action that I can think of. It is just the thing to lift America from being a pariah to being a great nation respected by all the peoples of the world. If Cheney/Bush are actually impeached and removed from office the whole world will cheer the American people and happiness will envelope the Earth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But, I DON'T WANT THEM IMPEACHED...
Posted by: ~Fiona~ on Nov 17, 2006 3:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...I WANT THEM TO ALL GO TO JAIL FOR A REEEEEEEALLY LONG TIME! They deserve a LOT worse than a slap on the hand.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yup... Posted by: ~Fiona~
Is it possible to remove Bush?
Posted by: colinmeister on Nov 17, 2006 3:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm sure the house can pass the impeachment of Bush, but finding him guilty in the senate is another matter. With 51:49, the Democrats have a chance in principle, but unfortunately Joe Lieberman, (Independent) Israel, will probably vote with the Republicans, and Cheyney's deciding vote will get Bush off the hook.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Much worse than that ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
I'm not aware of any part of the Constitution that says
Posted by: ellie on Nov 17, 2006 4:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that a sitting president has immunity from criminal charges. the problem is that we have 2 years left in this administration and many will feel that we've survived 6 years already, so just let things time out. here's my idea....

1. do the investigations and file criminal charges against Cheney first while including his wife and family as co-conspiritors, which they are for supporting darth and his decisions publically ( yes they all have!)

2. impeach Cheney. this eliminates the 'swing' vote in the senate

3. while starting the impeachment process on Cheney, file criminal charges against Bush and his entire administration including every aide, secretary, cabinet member, undersecretary and even the white house chef, literally 'clean house'. include little laura and her staff for conspiracy, plus daughters for hatching up an escape plan for daddy

4. there will be few resources for Bush to hide behind, big daddy will be hamstrung with most of his team rooting around for bail money, and let's arrest b41 for conspiracy to boot

this should get our dear prez to run fast for Paraguay and we nab him with his own homeland security team at the border!

(just my pre caffine thoughts for the morning)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Great!
Posted by: brad on Nov 17, 2006 5:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You just made my day, no my week. Now this is democracy in action, if only the Democrats are as receptive to the ideas of their supporters. Maybe Tocoueville was right and it is not the great governing system of america but the great civil society and community groups that make this country great. All of us are the antidote to corrupt politics, all of us has a duty to stand up for what we believe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Great! Posted by: MAD
Prosecute
Posted by: WilliamF on Nov 17, 2006 6:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let the congress get on with saving the New Deal and get Gonzales at DOJ to do his job by appointing a prosecutor to put these bums in jail. Bush has made an admission against his own self-interest to the entire world that he had been and is unlawfully spying on Americans. He tries to lay it off to the war he created in his own demented little mind by stating he was protecting us. All the while he took our rights away under the fourth amendment thinking he was King. This is a criminal case put together by the little weasel himself. I could be wrong but I think these fascists wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of keeping a jury from doin' the do on 'em. Indict, prosecute, sentance and buddy them up with Jack "screw the indians again" Abramoff in the federal joint. Can I get an Amen!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Prosecute Posted by: zedaker
Lets GO FOR IT!!!sickofsleaze
Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com on Nov 17, 2006 6:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We need to send a message to this bunch of lying criminal scumbags that we the people will not stand for the way Bush has shredded our Constitution, made a mockery of everything we have stood for all the while spouting pious nothings and has made us a laughing stock in the eyes of the rest of the world. He has taken away freedoms that date to Magna Carta and is poised to abrogate even more in the short time left before the new Senate and Congress convene in January.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» YEAH!!! GO FOR IT!!! Posted by: MAD
» RE: YEAH!!! GO FOR IT!!! sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
» RE: YEAH!!! GO FOR IT!!!..sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
Let the UN charge him with Crimes Against Humanity
Posted by: ggmurray on Nov 17, 2006 6:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush has so offended the world community that I can see justice coming more clearly from that body than from our slap-on-the-wrist impeachment remedy.

I think America must stay focused on the good that we can do with a Democratic majority, and we have just two years to give the people some real relief: health care, alternate energy R&D that makes middle east oil mongering obsolete, campaign finance reform to return elections to the people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Impeachment is not a partisan issue.
Posted by: jreinhart1 on Nov 17, 2006 7:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reasons for the impeachment of George W. Bush as well as his removal from office and a criminal investigation of the entire Bush Adminstration:

1. Generation of false or misleading use of intelligence while planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression. (pre-911 war prep for Afghanistan, Downing Street Memo & other witnesses such as Powell's assistant secretary on pre-911 war prep for Iraq and further false and misleading use of intel of WMD and al-Qaeda connections).

(The planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, a war in violation of international treaties, participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment)

2. Gross negligence in performing the duties required for the protection of the United States against attack of a foreign enemy. Afghanistan offered Osama bin Laden to US authorities with proof. There was none. All warnings from internal and external sources was ignored by the administration

(extraordinary gross negligence in the performance of their duties).

2. Allowing removal of evidence from the crime scene of federal jurisdiction due to interstate laws and national security.

3. Directing the murder, ill-treatment for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territories of Iraq and Afghanistan, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons in military custody or the implicit custody of persons of torture of prisoners sent to foreign lands , killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.

4. Murder, extermination and incarceration against the civilian population of Iraq and Afghanistan. Execution based on political, racial and religious grounds of the civilian population of Iraq and Afghanistan.

5. Directing of the use of illegal weapons against a civilian population:

* The use of cluster bombs in civilian areas. Several witnesses report children being wounded by these munitions lying in the street.

* The use of napalm, phosphorus, or other incendiary bombs.

* Attacks on a non-combative population, non-military targets and defenseless towns, villages, settlements and buildings.

* The natural environment was destroyed by air assaults that were disproportionate to the desired military objective.

* Allowing the plundering of civilian and cultural institutions. Charges cites the Al Beit Al Iraqi cultural centre in Baghdad being plundered, although American tanks were closely monitoring the area.

* Allowing the use of depleted uranium

6. Bypassing of FISA courts to spy on American citizens without probable cause.

7. Lying to Congress and Senate using false information to start a war of aggression

8. The willful disregard for upholding the oath of office of the Presidency of the United States of America
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

9. Selling off American property to foreign interests. (North American Union)

10. Murder of American military personnel using false information for waging a war of aggression.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Reasons to Impeach George Bush Part II
Posted by: jreinhart1 on Nov 17, 2006 7:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
11. Murder of Americans, willfully disregarding knowledge of highly toxic dust after 9/11/01.

12. Willful stalling of the investigation of 9/11/01.

13. Misuse of public money in military and reconstruction contracts.

14. Willful misuse of Iraqi public money

15. Willful disregard for American lives in the Katrina disaster including gun confiscation to protect citizens to protect life and limb.

16. Lying to the Department of Defense, inadequate support of US troops

17. Use of propaganda through the media to lie to the American people about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan

18. Withholding investigation of 2.3 Trillion missing from the Pentagon

19. Abolishing Posse Comitatus
.
.
.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well, here's a black hole for progressive energies ...
Posted by: AdamSelene40 on Nov 17, 2006 7:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The obvious condition being that while the House can Impeach, the Senate will not convict ... the process would take more than a year -- and one way or the other Bush and Company will be GONE in 2 years.

Yet ... if there was any single idea calculated to confim the Fox News and Wingnut stereotypes about Extreme-Left Liberal Progressive Democrat Godless-Church Traitors -- the 'persecution' of a 'sitting president in Time of War' would be one of the best.

Frankly, it will be hard enough to keep the Democratic party committed to pursuing Speaker Pelosi's "100 hours" agenda ... much less standing firm against the provocative Court and Embassidorial appointments BushCo will be using to demonstrate "Democrat Obstructionism" ...

If we could manage to breach the wall of secrecy around Cheney's energy policy and the process that led up to it ... that would be a major achievment.

If we could send a series of moderately progressive, generally popular pieces of legislation (like the Stem Cell Reseach funding bills, or the compromise immigration bill) which Bush would then be forced to veto ... THOSE would be achievments.

If 'cutting off funding for the war' ( which is how a Democratic congress ended the Vietnam War when Nixon's 'secret plan' turned out to be a fraud and a deception ) even gets out of Caucus and into open debate, THAT would a COLLOSSAL achievement.

But, if there is one thing that Grover Norquist and Bill O'Reilly would WANT us to be doing ... 'blogging and demonstrating for impeachment' would probably be right at the top of the War Over Christmas List.

(It's not the best way to pry contributions to AlterNet contributions out of MY pocket, at any rate.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Sufficient onto the day ... Posted by: AdamSelene40
Let's think about this impeachment.
Posted by: John Edward on Nov 17, 2006 7:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We need to address the intricacies of this whole thing. How does President of the United States Cheny sound?!!!! It is only 2 years to go and with the return of checks and balances and some adult supervision after rooting out the lunatic fringe neocons (all of them) from the White House, State Department and CIA, we could survive. After all this is just yet another case of failure by the wastrel son and a bail out by the doting father. This has all been predictable, although Bush has a way of beating out even my most dire predictions. I called Bush's Iraq war a disaster and a quagmire a month before it happened (I have Republican witnessess) and that was before the inept way the war was run and the incrediblely stupid decisions to fire the Bathists and the Iraqui Army. Better to have put them all on the payroll than what happened. The war was lost when we let them loot their country unchecked. That assured that we would never be taken seriously there. Pouring more in is just waste and denying the inevitable defeat. We need to follow the money trails and put a lot of those dollars back where they belong and put a lot of these people away. Clinton let the first Bush get away with the whole Contra thing in hopes of getting along. We can't make that mistake again. If you have not read the Baghdad Burning Blog do so for a dose of reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THREE GENERATIONS OF IMPORTANT PEOPLE
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Nov 17, 2006 7:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush can't be brought down without a landslide of others who share the guilt. Beginning with a Supreme Court decision in 2000 that made him president, then a (surprise?) attack on our country which presented an opportunity, not a reason to go to war. The bodies continue to pile up. How do we explain NOT doing anything ? The election spoke volumes. Why stop here. We all have a constitutional obligation to protect our country. Messy? So what. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Impeachment is not an option
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Nov 17, 2006 8:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If staying the course is not an option, then Impeachment is also not an option--it is a requirement!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Impeachment - LMAO!!
Posted by: MAD on Nov 17, 2006 8:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I posted this in "08 Buzz" but thought it was suitable for this thread as well.

You guys better settle in and get comfy with the status quo, because at the rate things are going now you'll be living in a full blown fascist dictatorship headed by the de facto president GWB 'til 2012 and beyond. Given that most Americans will sit down and shut up when they are told, I find it exceedingly hard to believe that you'll kick up much of a fuss when "terrorist sympathisers" are rounded up and discretely tucked away in KBR "camps for the politically divergent". Let's face facts and drop this silly talk about impeachment shall we? Corporate America will never allow their golden boy to go down like that. He, along with Cheney, are the geese that lay the golden eggs for the likes of Halliburton, Exxon, Pfizer, etc. Remember this - impeaching Bush is tantamount to impeaching the true socio-economic elite, not only in the US but around the world.

You'll notice how Big Daddy & Co. stepped in to install one of their own if only to ensure the continuity of the Carlyle group and the heavy-hitting interests they represent. Again the American public thinks they can jump head first into a political game that has always been played so far above their heads that they can't even see the surface. To wit, '00 & '04 elections. Sure, you saw that the elections were stolen but what did you do about it? Absolutely nothing. So keep cheering for the "good guys" and continue believing that a ridiculous two-party system can actually affect any real change in the most ultra-corrupt political system that currently blights the earth.

What's so damn endearing about you guys is how you desperately cling to this Democratic fairytale - hope against hope. Forget actually creating viable, multiple parties or maybe even getting off your ever-fattening asses to do something proactive for a change. I forgot, Americans are strictly reactive, only taking action after the ball has been dropped. Oh well, better to eat Captain Crunch and watch trash tv while saving up to buy that shiny new Jet Ski!! Yeah!!! You go America. The world is no longer watching - they've long since given up hope.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Americans are strictly reactive? Posted by: Iconoclast421
» vomitous Posted by: grim ripper
» RE: Impeachment - LMAO!! Posted by: thweems
Practical Impeachment Steps - and why we can't go directly to criminal prosecution
Posted by: sarahmckee on Nov 17, 2006 8:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1) Thanks for Alternet's commitment to support the coordinated national project to impeach and remove President Bush and Vice-president Cheney that started in Philadelphia last Saturday!

The project's website is at www.democrats.com. As of this minute, 22,076 people have signed its impeachment petition. (Signing Button is on right; must click "sign here" to see the 10-point petition).

Even with cable, www.democrats.com sometimes takes as long as 5 minutes to load. It must be getting a gazillion hits. (Note: www.democrats.com is independent of the Democratic Party.)

Signing also sends an automatic email to your Congressperson, with both your name and the petition. We're starting to fill their inboxes.

www.democrats.com also facilitates Americans' organizing themselves into impeachment committees by Congressional district. An excellent tool.

I'm old enough to remember Nixon's landslide victory, the shock of the Watergate breakins, public pressure for impeachment, the disgusting revelations of the Watergate hearings, and Nixon's ignominious resignation.

While not knowing how our present impeachment effort will play out, I do know that our Republic is lost already. To recover it we must keep at impeachment and removal thoughtfully, persistently, and effectively.

2) I'm also a former federal prosecutor. So may I comment on the idea, expressed above, of skipping impeachment and removal, and going directly to criminal prosecution of the President and Veep?

The Attorney General, of course, heads the U.S. Department of Justice. The AG right now is Alberto Gonzales.

AG Gonzales therefore is ultimately the boss of every single federal prosecutor in the land, and this AG is in the Bush administration torture conspiracy right up to his neck. The chances of getting any federal prosecutor to convene a grand jury to investigate and, one trusts, indict Bush and Cheney, are virtually nil.

In other words, to prosecute Bush and Cheney in the United States, we need a new Attorney General. For a new AG, Bush and Cheney must be out of office. Voila! Impeach, try, remove. Then the new President appoints a new AG.

Nonetheless, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 has made it much more difficult to prosecute in the U.S. for torture by U.S. officials. This is one reason to support their criminal investigation and prosecution by Germany.

3) Germany also has jurisdiction to prosecute U.S. citizens for war crimes. That's because it has a universal jurisdiction to prosecute torture whereever committed, by anyone, against anyone.

As soon as Donald Rumsfeld resigned, the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York (www.ccr-ny.org) asked the German prosecutor to open a criminal investigation of Rumsfeld and other high-ranking U.S. officials for war crimes, including torture and holding people in prison indefinitely.

Note: The German prosecutor has discretion to accept this case, but need not do so!

If you want the German prosecutor to investigate and prosecute Rumsfeld, Gonzales, and some of their conspirators, including named lawyers responsible for the infamous legal opinions authorizing torture, go to www.ccr-ny.org; click on War Crimes Complaint Filed Against Rumsfeld (with photo); and then click on Take Action (with Rumsfeld photo) to send the email supplied. It's in both German and in English.

The stomach-turning Introduction to CCR's War Crimes Complaint and the Table of Contents are at www.ccr-ny.org. So are revealing statements by witnesses, including Janis Karpinski, and international law experts. If these aren't also reason enough to impeach, by the way, I cannot imagine what is. Sarah McKee in Massachusetts

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dee from Virginia
Posted by: deeschumann on Nov 17, 2006 8:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
PURSUING IMPEACHMENT IS A DANGEROUS COURSE

ALTERNET AND OTHER ORGS ARE SPINNING A DANGEROUS COURSE BY GIVING PRO-IMPEACHMENT COMMENTS AN OBVIOUS PRIORITY OVER THOSE THAT OPPOSE IT. THIS IS THE TACTIC THAT KARL ROVE AND FOX NEWS HAS ENGAGED IN AND EFFECTIVELY SHUT DOWN HONEST DEBATE LEADING TO THE HORROR OF THE RECENT PAST. I CALL ON ALTERNATE AND OTHERS TO ALLOW EQUAL EXPRESSION OF BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE. NOT THE 10 TO 1 MANIPULATION OF FOX (10 COMMENTS THAT SUPPORT OUR AGENDA TO 1 COMMENT OPPOSED). BE HONEST, AN OPEN DEBATE DEMANDS A 10 TO 10 FORMAT THAT ALLOWS READERS TO SEE BOTH SIDES. THOSE OF US WHO LOOK TO YOUR WEB SITE ARE LIKELY MORE LIBERAL AND DO NOT REFLECT THE VIEW OF THE ENTIRE ELECTORATE. KEEP THIS IN MIND WHEN YOU FAIL TO ALLOW HONEST DEBATE. THESE TACTICS LED TO A DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS.

I AM IN TOTAL AGREEMENT WITH SPEAKER-ELECT PELOSI. THE NEW CONGRESS WAS ELECTED TO FOCUS ON THE WORK OF THE PEOPLE THAT HAS BEEN IGNORED FOR THE PAST SIX YEARS

ENGAGING IN AN IMPEACHMENT VANDETTA TO PROVE A POINT DENIES THOSE OF US WHO VOTED FOR CANDIDATES TO DO THE WORK OF THE PEOPLE WILL SIMPLY IGNORE THE MANDATE THAT WE HAVE GIVEN TO CONGRESS. THE NEW CONGRESS MUST HEED WHAT THE ELECTORATE HAS DEMANDED. IF THE NEWLY ELECTED CONGRESS ENGAGES IN THE TACTICS OF DISTRACTION ACCOMPLISHED BY THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION (WHICH LED TO THE NEOCONS LOSING CONGRESS) THEN THERE WILL BE A CHANGE IN LEADERSHIP IN 2008. THE ELECTORATE WAS "FOOLED" TWICE AND BUSH WAS RE-ELECTED IN 2004. THE ELECTORATE WILL NOT BE FOOLED TWICE AGAIN.

I BELIEVE THAT ANY ACTION ALLOWED TO HOLD BUSH AND CHENEY ACCOUNTABLE SHOULD NOT DISTRACT THE NEWLY ELECTED CONGRESS FROM THE WORK THEY WERE ELECTED TO ACCOMPLISH. LET A "SPECIAL COUNSEL" BE APPOINTED TO CARRY OUT THE TASK (NIXON,CLINTON). OR LET A NEW ATTORNEY GENERAL BRING CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST THE TWOSOME AND TREAT THEM AS THE COMMON CRIMINALS THEY ARE IN 2009. IF SUCH TOOLS ARE UNAVAILABLE TO US, THEN LET HISTORY TELL THE STORY OF THEIR EXECUTIVE ABUSES AND GIVE THEM THE "LEGACY OF SHAME" THAT THEY HAVE EARNED.

SHAME ON ALTERNET AND OTHER ORGS FOR JOINING THE TACTICS OF THE "DO NOTHING" CONGRESSES OF THE PAST FEW YEARS THAT USED DISTRACTIONS TO INTERFERE WITH THE "WILL OF THE PEOPLE". IF NOT, WE MAY WELL HAVE A PRESIDENT McCAIN, PRESIDENT ROMNEY OR PRESIDENT JULIANI (sp?) WHO WON'T BE INCLINED TO TAKE FORMER LEADERSHIP OF THEIR PARTY TO TASK.

THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR IS EXACTLY WHY I DETERMINED THAT AS AN INDEPENDENT I HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO SUPPORT THE POLITICS OF DISTRACTION IN WHICH THE DNC AND RNC CONTINUE TO ENGAGE IN TACTICS THAT VALUE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PARTYS AND THE WISDOM OF THE PARTY LEADERSHIP TO THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PEOPLE AND THE WISDOM OF THE ELECTORATE.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dee from Virginia Posted by: jwg
» RE: Dee from Virginia Posted by: ggmurray
» RE: Dee from Virginia Posted by: genetix03
International War Crimes
Posted by: mite on Nov 17, 2006 8:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We need to remember the real war criminals ' the puppet masters'- CFR, Tri-Lateral-Commission, World Bank, IMF, and Bilderberg Group. Least we not forget the puppets who took an Oath before they swore to represent us Congress-The citizens of these states that combine to make this country U.S.,
The Siders Web is a good resource to read in how this whole Iraq Middle east s&&t started. Lets not forget Bush Senior and Clinton in these investigation into impeachment and war crime trials.
Just for a different perspective remember 9/11, there are 84 other countries who lost citizens in the WTC in 2001. I think these citizens/countries of the world need a voice also into these war crimes- it's not only us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Letter to Mother Jones (Excerpt's published in Backtalk)
Posted by: Pat K on Nov 17, 2006 9:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mother Jones published a couple excerpts from my response to "So You Think You Want to Impeach?" by Tim Dickinson. See "Impeaching Negativity" in the Backtalk section of the Nov/Dec issue.

------------------------- original letter -------------------------

Dear Mr. Dickinson,

In "So, You Think You Want to Impeach?" you use your review as a platform from which to tell Americans not to bother with impeachment; that it's not in the cards. (Effectively saying "it won't happen, so shut up."). But if you told people who are fighting to eradicate AIDS or poverty or hunger that "it won't happen, so shut up" I can't imagine you would expect -- or even want -- any of them to listen to you.

If you had argued that the charges against Bush and Cheney were baseless, your desire for people to give up the fight might be understandable. But when you point out that their attacks on the Constitution are blatantly self-evident ("hiding in plain sight") and that "the articles of impeachment write themselves," and then criticize the "tomes" for merely introducing unnecessary complexity, you simplify and strengthen the case for impeachment.

Your desire for people to give up the fight is apparently based solely on your pronouncement that the fight is futile.

Your blind assertion that "the American people would far prefer . . .two more years of the disastrous presidency of George W. Bush than to see the White House change hands in what could only be described as an administrative coup" can never be tested because the scenario you present is not necessarily the one the American people would face. As the threat of impeachment becomes real, Bush and Cheney have choices too. If they choose they can keep the Presidency in Republican hands.

If Bush and Cheney choose to be removed through impeachment rather than resignation, then the succession We the People established in the 25th amendment will govern and the Speaker of the House will take the office of the presidency. As long as the succession is in accord with the laws we established it reflects our will. Some may call it an "an administrative coup" but name calling can't change reality.

Of all the rationalizations for inaction, some form of "it won't happen, so shut up" is perhaps the most insidious. Failing to fight because "it's futile" is a self-defeating prophesy. The things worth fighting for will never happen if nobody takes up the fight. Fortunately for the nation, the question for Members of Congress is not "will we win?" The Congressional oath to uphold the Constitution is not an oath to win -- it is an oath to fight -- to "support and defend."

To fulfill their oath each Member of Congress must be on the lookout for threats (turning a "blind eye" is not an option). When they identify a threat, their First Duty is to notify us and tell us what they believe we must do to defend against it. (Not what they think we will do; not what they think they can do; not what they think other Members of Congress might do. Rather, they have a duty to tell us what they personally believe the nation must do.)

Hopefully you and others promoting the "Won't happen, so shut up" mantra will recognize that when principle demands action, outcome expectations do not enter into the decision to act. The choices are simple: you act or betray principle; silence is complicity. Whether or not the establishment continues to be immobilized by rationalization, we can hope that more and more ordinary Americans choose faith and courage over pessimism disguised as "realism." (Though not that many more Americans are required as the new Newsweek poll shows 51% want impeachment to be a priority in the new Congress.)

Sincerely,

Patty K


------------------

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DEE FROM VIRGINIATO MAKE MY POSITION CLEAR. MY ARGUEMENT IS NOT THAT IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN SO GIVE UP.
Posted by: deeschumann on Nov 17, 2006 10:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
TO MAKE MY POSITION CLEAR. MY ARGUEMENT IS NOT THAT IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN SO GIVE UP. I BELIEVE THERE ARE OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAT WILL SEE THAT JUSTICE IS DONE WITHOUT DISTRACTING THE PRESENT CONGRESS FROM DOING THE "PEOPLE'S BUSINESS" IN TWO YEARS THAT THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS FAILED TO ACCOMPLISH IN SIX YEARS.

TAKE A LOOK AT MY POST "IMPEACHMENT IS DANGEROUS" ABOVE AND LET ME KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS. DEE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

IMPeACH and JAIL BUSH
Posted by: thinkverybig on Nov 17, 2006 10:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I will be so glad when BUSH is finally IMPEACHED and JAILED.

Now that's time for a $20 million dollar celebration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Impeachment is a defensive act.
Posted by: Pat K on Nov 17, 2006 10:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Impeachment is a defensive act. It is about removing a threat. Just as a cop has the duty to protect the public by pulling over and taking the the keys from a drunk driver; members of Congress have a duty to protect the Constitution by impeaching and "taking the keys" from officials who are drunk with power.

"Getting even" (balancing the scales of justice; retribution) comes with criminal prosecution and punishment AFTER members of Congress have removed the power to destroy from the destroyers.

Message to Members of Congress: Just Do It!

When you convene the 110th Congress, introduce Articles of Impeachment, assign the resolution to a committee, and get on with it already.

You cannot escape with calls for "investigations." We know all we need to know. Incontrovertible Articles of Impeachment are already proven by the public record (if you question this, please read this DU journal entry)


{must investigate first} = {don't have a case} = {nullification of powerful case we HAVE}

Time Is NOT on our side.

The price of delay could be unimaginable. Any day we could see another terrorist attack; Bush could declare war on Iran or Syria or North Korea or Venezuela or even Haiti; or some completely unforeseen event could make it impossible to rescue our national soul for a long time to come.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DC FARCE on TRIAL
Posted by: Hal on Nov 17, 2006 1:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like so many other threads, this one completely dodges the key issue.

Sellout Pelosi and her “impeachment off the table” choir stands squarely for the status quo: a craven DC red herring.

Virtually the entire Congress agreed to promote a nonstop 911 cover-up into a phony “war on terror”. This represents criminal fact as policy that any blogger with half a clue well understood as a sham before the first bomb drop from Eurasian to Mid East theatres.

The reality is that IMPEACHMENT opens the door to full and genuine investigation thru accountability that in turn could bring down the entire government. (In other words, no more LIMITED HANGOUT cover from a corporate poodle MSM).

And a criminal, unconstitutional government should be brought down in a real democratic republic. The fact we DO NOT have a democratic republic is the core issue at stake. What we do have is a cooked 3-branch puppet farce at work for organized corporate crime.

IMPEACHMENT is the first step in putting Washington and its temp sellouts on trial as one grotesque front for monopolist corporate mobsters.

Bottom line?

This is a systemic matter. We can no longer afford lapdog criminals running DC for their string-pulling oligarch clients.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

IMPEACHMENT POSTCARDS: send to Pelosi, your rep & senators
Posted by: yurbud on Nov 17, 2006 1:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Both are 4 x 6.

I made a separate one for Pelosi because I thought I could put her address on the other side, but they don't let you customize that.

If you got the generic ones, you could send one to Pelosi, your congressperson, your senators, and give another set to someone else to do the same.

Get 'em here:


http://www.cafepress.com/fascart/2097421

The back of both is a generic postcard format with layout for stamp, address, return address, and room for additional comments.

To Pelosi:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/51035547307@N01/296843646


Send to:

Nancy Pelosi
2371 Rayburn HOB