On Monday last week, something important happened in Washington. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, the Democratic representative from Cleveland, OH, who early in the primary season won some of the biggest applause lines in the Democratic presidential candidate debates, introduced 35 articles calling for the impeachment of President George W. Bush for high crimes and misdemeanors.
You'd be excused if you didn't know this happened. There was almost no reporting on the event that day or the next, which took several hours to accomplish, along with several hours Tuesday for to be read into the Congressional Record. Kucinich's address to the House was broadcast live on C-Span. But it was not announced in advance or highlighted on the C-Span website, and there were not many news reports on the historically significant fact that articles of impeachment had been filed against the president during subsequent days.
A week later, it has still not been reported in the New York Times, the nation’s self-described “newspaper of record,” even though the Times had just days before Rep. Kucinich’s action, editorialized about the enormity of the president’s lies in tricking the country into invading Iraq—one of the crimes leading Rep. Kucinich’s long list.
A number of papers did editorialize against impeachment, including the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Florida Sun Sentinel—but it says something that these publications thought it more important to attack Rep. Kucinich’s action than to actually report on it as a news item.
Even the Washington Post’s news report was an example more of the sclerotic state of American journalism than of genuine reporting. It began:
“Having failed in efforts to impeach Vice President Cheney, Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-Ohio) escalated his battle against the administration this week by introducing 35 articles of impeachment against President Bush, using a parliamentary maneuver that will probably force a vote today.”
Any journalism student who wrote a lede like Post staff writer Ben Pershing’s in a classroom exercise would have gotten a “D” or an “F” for it. Talk about backing into a story! First of all, Kucinich hasn’t “failed” in his effort to impeach Cheney. Congress has failed to impeach our criminal vice president and regent. Technically, Kucinich’s Cheney impeachment bill is still lodged in the House Judiciary Committee, where it is now joined in political limbo by the Ohio congressman’s new Bush impeachment measure.
The unwillingness of the nation’s news media to seriously consider the need for Congress to respond to and challenge the president’s clear abuses of power—even as they themselves condemn of those abuses of power—is a blot on the journalistic profession perhaps worse, and of more lasting consequence, than their failure to act as watchdogs and critics during the run-up to the Iraq War, when they acted more as patriotic cheerleaders than as news organizations.
As impeachment advocates, including Rep. Kucinich, have pointed out, unless this president and vice president are impeached by the current Congress, any—and probably every—future president will feel empowered by unchallenged precedent to ignore laws passed by the Congress, to go to war without Congressional approval, to spy on Americans in violation of the law, to ignore court orders, to abrogate international treaties, and to lie to Congress and the American people. Unless Congress asserts its rights under Article I, it will no longer even be a co-equal branch of government, but instead will have been reduced to nothing more than a debating society.
Editorialists, while refusing to honestly report on this Constitutional crisis, have been parroting the claim of gutless and calculating Democratic Party leaders like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in saying that with the nation at war and with a critical election approaching, there are “more pressing” matters to consider than impeachment, and that impeachment would be a “diversion.”
This is nonsense. As hundreds of American troops continue to die each quarter in a war that never should have happened, and that was launched five years ago and continued for half a decade thanks to administration lies and deception, there is nothing more important facing this nation than restoring Constitutional government and Constitutional checks and balances—something that can only be done through the Constitutional process of impeachment.
The American people instinctively know this. In polls, fully half or more of the public consistently continue to say, even at this late date, that they want the president impeached. Considering the media blackout on the issue, this is truly astonishing and even heartening. But it will take more than polls to get impeachment rolling. The public needs to start demanding that its representatives take action, on pain of being voted out of office.
I was at an anti-war forum in New Jersey last Friday evening sponsored by a group of peace activists calling themselves the Iraq Forum Organizing Team. When forum panelist Rep. Rob Andrews was asked by an audience member whether he favored impeachment and supported Rep. Kucinich’s articles of impeachment, Andrews fudged. He claimed, ingenuously, that the articles had been sent to the House Judiciary Committee for hearings, and said that he personally thought that Bush had committed an impeachable “high crime” by outing the identity of a covert agent of the CIA, Valerie Plame, and added that if the Judiciary Committee “develops a bunch of evidence” to support that charge, he would vote to impeach.
As I pointed out to the congressman, he certainly knows that that is a cheap dodge. I said that he was well aware that the way legislation moves forward in Congress is that members like himself sign on as co-sponsors of legislation they favor, and that then, and only then, those measures get hearings. Without co-sponsors, bills go to committee to be killed by inaction, which is the intention of sending Kucinich’s articles of impeachment to the committee. I said if Rep. Andrews were honestly to believe that the president might have committed any high crimes, he should either file articles of impeachment himself, or co-sign the excellent set of articles already filed by Rep. Kucinich. Instead, Andrews, like the rest of the Democrats and Republicans in the House, with the notable exception of Rep. Wexler and California Reps. Barbara Lee and Lynn Woolsey, have avoided Kucinich’s articles like the plague.
The audience loudly applauded this condemnation of Rep. Andrews.
Dave Lindorff, a columnist for Counterpunch, is author of several recent books ("This Can't Be Happening! Resisting the Disintegration of American Democracy" and "Killing Time: An Investigation into the Death Penalty Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal"). His latest book, coauthored with Barbara Olshanshky, is "The Case for Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush from Office (St. Martin's Press, May 2006). His writing is available at http://www.thiscantbehappening.net
An excellent article; one that should be read by virtually everyone, but sadly will reach only a relative few. The problem in this country is immense, and will continue as long as the "us vs. them" mentality supercedes Truth.
by
Bill Cain (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 290 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 11:04:53 AM
is the way I see it. It occurred to me that most members involved in the Congress, Judicial and assuredly, the Presidency think we the people are complete idiots and therefore not worth listening to. It seems like a form of elitism that is new to the 21st century. To them it's a way to justify their high incomes and comfortable lives. Not new to the way of the world but new to our Democracy because it is so organized.
The only way to confront this 21st century American politician elitism is to keep steady as you go. That is, keep the Constitution in mind and do not STOP SPEAKING OUT for what you know is correct and in line with our Constitution. And, do not re-elect the egregious offenders.
by
zephyr (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 64 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 11:25:24 AM
Main stream media is useless at best and obstructionist at worst. In the issue of impeachment they are worst than obstructionist because they refuse to even put the issue in front of the American public which is their duty as the 4th estate. They flunk civics on this one, passing the mantle of 4th estate to the interenet.
I posed this Open Letter to Congress as well as a follow up. It is also posted on Jacksonville's new site here. Impeach. And everyone who responded to my OpEd poll says impeach.
I faxed this to my FL reps, to Kucinich, Wexler and Pelosi and sent copies to major news papers and the AP.
I have encouraged people to spread the word by sending these letters to all of their friends and asking everyone to fax to their reps with copies to Kucinich, Wexler and Pelosi as well as to as many news papers as possible.
Media will not do the responsible thing. They are under the control of the administration in that regard, how else to explain why they are hiding this story?
is why we must call for impeachment and support Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler, House representatives who are speaking out, fearlessly, by presenting the 35 Articles of Impeachment. Write to John Conyers, chair of House Judiciary committee where the 35 Articles will reside, to your rep. and senators, afterdowningstreet.com, talk about it at work or play. Just get the words out of your mouth and some part of them will go into someone else's ears.
by
zephyr (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 64 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 11:43:22 AM
thought i'd share something that didn't come up that night regarding andrews and impeachment - and for the record, as the main organizer, i consider myself an impeachment activist first - how dare you dave! ;-)
i stood by like a hawk to ensure that the written questions on impeachment that i collected were not cast aside. the moderator did combine them into one question, but it should be known there were more questions by the audience on impeachment than any other single question.
anyway, there was a democratic committeeman in the audience who told me at an impeachment meeting a few years ago that rob andrews had told him personally that if there were ever articles of impeachment against george bush he would vote to impeach - i am quite sure this was before the plame scandal erupted. clearly, he must have thought articles would never be introduced and felt free to say that.
but, the thing that always angered me and i have made it clear to my congressman is that if you say you would vote to impeach someone and there are no current articles to vote on, then why the hell aren't you introducing them or at the least strongly calling for hearings!
during the open mic portion, when that committeeman got up to speak, i thought for sure he would remind andrews of that promise. instead, he talked about how we had to be sure to keep our district in the hands of the democrats. i thought i would throw up.
and yes, we will be following up on the impeachment matter here in district 1.
by
Cheryl Biren-Wright (19 articles, 23 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 351 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 12:16:05 PM
I know impeachment is your number one issue. It's encouraging that it was the number one question.
Rep. Andrews is clearly a slippery sleeze of a politician. It was really a pleasure to watch him eviscerated by Adam Kokesh, the IVAW speaker. Adam's verbal demolition of Andrews encouraged me to speak out when the congressman tried to weasel around the impeachment issue.
We really need to hammer these people, and that included--especially!--John Conyers, who has shamed himself and is in danger of ending a distinguished career in Congress as a pathetic joke. Having finally won the chair of the Judiciary Committee on which he served so long, he has done absolutely nothing of consequence.
by
Dave Lindorff (343 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 160 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 12:55:33 PM
"John Conyers, who has shamed himself and is in danger of ending a distinguished career in Congress as a pathetic joke. "
Worse - He is in danger of being remembered by history as "the guy who blocked impeachment of gwb and rc, by stalling hearings indefinitely". Why is he protecting them?
by
Aurora (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 345 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 2:24:23 PM
Did you all think the Patriot Acts (I & II) were to protect America from foreign enemies. They were designed to protect domestic enemies like Bush/Cheney.
And the fact that Democrats were well aware of everything that was being done doesn't help.
by
ed kriner (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 27 comments)
on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 11:11:58 AM
i've seen plenty of impeachment signs on cars with all sorts of phrases - i've had an impeachment bumper sticker on my car for 3 years. it's not all that brave. it's fun, of course, to pull in front of a car that has a "W" sign and slow down, but there's really not much to it.
if you want to talk about physical bravery - go sit in and refuse to leave your congressman's office. that's putting your body into it and yes there are thousands across our country who have done that and continue to do it.
by
Cheryl Biren-Wright (19 articles, 23 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 351 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 1:36:37 PM
Yesterday I saw a huge sign painted on a house in N Calif -
It said, "Impeach and Prosecute the Charles Manson of American Politics."
I'm not claiming this was the wittiest or most immediately understandable sign in the world. You had to think for a moment to realize what it was saying. But it was hand-painted, and suspended on the side of a private residence on a main thoroughfare, just north of San Francisco.
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1173 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 3:26:09 PM
Many who claim to support impeachment aren't serious
Two things:
1. I put together a collection of documents related to warrantless surveillance and NSA warrantless wiretapping and data collection. Originally these documents were widely scattered pdfs, and I converted them to html with links to citations, Supreme Court decisions, etc. This collection is downloadable. It is here: click here
2. I wrote to David Swanson of AfterDowningStreet.org and asked if he would be interested in joining me in a class action suit against current members of the House and Senate Judiciary and Intelligence Committees. The grounds would be that they were in effect in active Contempt of Congress by failing to hold hearings and perform due diligence investigations necessary to pass legislation.
Swanson sent me a somewhat flip non-response response, stating that "Contrary to popular belief, I am not a lawyer."
I responded that I never thought he was. But this does indicate the level of seriousness of some of the most vocal proponents of impeachment.
The only way to reach the majority of Americans is to slap commercials in front of their face. Only large groups can afford to do commercials.
I contacted MoveOn, Common Cause and People for the American Way immediately after Kucinich introduced the articles of impeachment demanding they get involved and suppport impeachment. If more people contacted them I think they would get involved.
These groups have the ability to raise enough funds to get commercials on the air. That is probably the only way we can wake people up and get more people involved.
Has anyone else here contacted these groups?
by
Kevin McCaffery (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 2:03:12 PM
Some of us have been lobbying groups like MoveOn and the ACLU (who were key in getting the public to rally around hearings against Nixon) for years. Moveon simply refuses to address it.
We managed to get a state chapter and several local chapters of the ACLU to endorse impeachment and the National Lawyers Guild has also endorsed impeachment.
I interviewed Larry Cox of Amnesty International last week. He is traveling around with his Guantanamo cell exhibit calling for Justice, yet they won't endorse impeachment. We spoke in circles until we were blue.
I think you can forget getting Moveon to support it. They are beholden to the democratic leadership, but hey if you've got the energy for it far be it for me to talk someone out of trying. You never know.
There may still be hope with the ACLU. Start with your local chapter and lobby them and then have them lobby their state chapter to put pressure on National. This link will take you to a page where I have posted current National ACLU's statement on impeachment. You will also find the original wording to the pamphlet the ACLU of 1973 distributed calling for hearings on Nixon. Read it and you will think you're reading about Bush and Cheney and our current Congress.
In fact, the ACLU threatened impeachment in an ad in the New York Times in 2005 when Conyers introduced H. Res. 635, but their threat faded away along with Conyers. You can read more about it here. I think even MoveOn made a veiled threat a few years ago and that disappeared too - why do you think that might be.
Many attempts have been made to raise money for TV commercials and they would be great, just not enough everyday citizens willing to shell out and no group that has the dough willing.
Dave's article focuses, of course, on the media and I think that is where people should start directing their energy and I don't mean just through letters to the editor and phone calls. That should be kept up, but it's past time to organize outside the media outlets, raise a little hell, block the sidewalk, get in their face. Chase them down with your own film crew and ask them why they're suppressing this important information. You get the idea.
by
Cheryl Biren-Wright (19 articles, 23 quicklinks, 8 diaries, 351 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 2:46:56 PM
Nearly 6,000 signatures. It can be done if brought up as a question of privilege by a House member, House Rules IX is included with the petition.
We have to mobilize something quickly. After they rig these elections and McCain/Liebeman pull off their "stunning" victory, we will not be able to. And that is a fact.
We will not get support from the major democrats because they are complict and the democratic voters have been lied to by the democratic leadership so they think impeachment will cost Obama his victory.
So, we are pretty much on our own. And I agree with the other commenter that many of the big voices out there calling for impeachment, seem a bit timid to say the least, and some seem like they are doing just fine CALLING for impeachment rather than achieving it. Like they will have to find a new issue to create constant attention for themselves afterward.
So, what do we do? Civil Disobediance? Hunger Strikes? Where do we go from here? time is very short.
by
scott creighton (24 articles, 10 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 203 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 3:16:07 PM
"So, what do we do? Civil Disobediance? Hunger Strikes? Where do we go from here? time is very short."
Yes, time is essential. We all have our particular main concerns. For some it's the war, for others the economy, or stolen elections, climate change, health care, 9/11, and so on.
Now, it is time to begin holding someone accountable. For this, we need concentrated focus, and determination to see it through. Clear, conscious awareness of what is at stake, of what needs to be achieved, and the perseverance to see it through. Dennis K. has spearheaded this.
Point being, if we get it right in our own concious awareness, then our outer actions, whatever they may be, will have the right effect (whether that is 4+ hours worth of impeachment articles to be read, or Keith O's "Why don't you (gw) shut the hell up!", or someone hanging a Charles Manson gov banner on a house in Ca, or whatever).
by
Aurora (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 345 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 4:54:40 PM
We don't have a media - it's not ours - it belongs to criminals - it's function is propaganda - one should not look for it to tell truth - it is not there for us.
Tyranny 101 in Take-over of a Nation - #1- infiltrate mass media. Those you cannot buy you fire or otherwise silence.
We can not expect people that have been bought and sold and have ideologies 180 degrees opposite ours to suddenly see the light and start helping us - it's not going to happen - don't waste your time even discussing it - who's going to replace Russert? Who cares? Whomever it will be will be a lair.
If you want change we need to cram or representatives offices with bodies - every day, morning to night - non-stop until they do our bidding.
And if that doesn't work it's time to take it to the next level and physically throw the bums out and start from scratch. It's called a revolution. And like "impeachment" should not be something we're afraid of - it's a good thing.
No nuance - just do it.
by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 1442 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 3:58:57 PM
... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
by
Susan Guest (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 79 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 4:22:01 PM
While I sympathize with most of the comments, I think the most important point is that this republic should not allow the office of president to acquire heretofore unconstitutional powers.
I also think that Congress dropped the ball out of fear and that they are still afraid. Some of this fear is quite rational. When the war powers were first granted and with the knowledge they had at the time (remember Colin Powell?), there was no other choice. The people, made fat-headed on a diet of Fox News would never have allowed it, anyway.
Even now there may be unintended consequences of splitting up the nation over impeachment with the currency and the economy tanking and the wars still on and the risk of wider war.
Still, it should be done, and, isn't it possible, legally, right up to the last hour of the Bush term?
I think it would be prudent to introduce it at the last legally permissible hour.
Then, rather than create a vacuum and have a leadership (bad as it is) compromised at the very time that leadership is needed, it will allow this administration to do their damage and get all the blame for it. The scandal of an impeachment will not mute the scandal of this administration. The Democratic victory will be larger and broader as things get worse into the fall without a long diversionary interruption.
After all, the goal is not to shame the president, but rather to save the Constitution.
by
bookhunter (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 9:13:48 PM
Bush and company have displayed utter incompetence in discharging their duties be it Katrina, protecting the US before our borders were breached by 19 agents,according to the Bush story,and the displayed incompetence in formulating a plan of attack and victory in Iraq in a reasonable time.
Why in the world would we leave this ignoramus in charge of the military with a possible provocation by Israel with Iran a distinct possibility? With the nuclear foul-up(?) last year with armed missiles flying over the US they show a lack of respect of the awesome destructive powers, both physically and psychologically, of these weapons. Therefore they shouldn't be in charge of any nuclear material. Look at the eternal mess they have created in Iraq with depleted (my ass ) uranium.
Get 'um outta here, NOW !
by
tjb (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 218 comments)
on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 7:14:39 AM
We get far more news about Brittany's latest child assault or Paris's last nite in jail than of the reasons or needs for impeachment. The "free" press used to be all over anything of this sort and now they actually try to hush it up. Obviously the military industrial complex that backs Bush/Cheney and owns the "free" press is and has taken over this country. Movies like Rollerball keep popping into my mind whenever I think of this mess. Capitalism is like any other 'ism. If it is allowed to go to extremes it will destroy anything in it's path including a certain Democratic Republic that I have been attached to for my entire life. We get far more information about what is going on in government from TV shows like Boston Legal, Simpsons, Family Guy, South Park, Lil' Bush, and stand up comedians than we ever get from what are supposed to be our "free" and reputable news media. If that does not tell us something is rotten in DC then nothing will.
by
Hayesml47 (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 471 comments)
on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 8:40:13 AM
