Impeachment as an issue, and impeachable crimes themselves, get short shrift in the U.S. Media these days.
Back during the Clinton presidency, when the president was being charged with lying about a marital infidelity, a number of major publications were calling for his resignation or impeachment. Now, when the president is openly undermining the fundamental principles of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, starting wars in violation of the Nuremburg Charter, ignoring acts passed by the Congress, and stripping citizens of their right to a trial, not one paper has called for resignation, much less impeachment.
Stories about the impeachment movement are either rediculed or ignored.
Books about impeachment are simply ignored.
Take "The Case for Impeachment," by Dave Lindorff and Barbara Olshansky (St. Martin's Press, May 2006). There are plenty of reviews of Ann Coulter's screeds, but this serious work has not been reviewe d by a single mainstream publication. Despite this, the hardcover book has sold 30,000 copies in two months since its release.
Perhaps more telling, when C-Span Books TV, last Saturday (Aug. 26), aired a one-hour program on the book, featuring the two authors speaking at Robin's Books, an independent bookseller in Philadelphia, the book leapt from 30,000th polace to 42nd overnight on Amazon's best-seller list. Clearly the public is hungry for news and information on impeachment.
It will be interesting to see how the public responds to this.
The program breaks news not available elsewhere. For example, author Olshansky, an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights, tells of how one of her clients among the 300 detainees she represents at Guantanamo, who was among the three who committed suicide last June, was just a 17-year old kid--one of the ones captured and brought to Guantanamo by U.S. Forces in Afghanistan as a child back in 2001, when he was only 12.
This unfortunate boy, despairing of ever escaping his capitivity, actually had been found innocent by the government and was scheduled to be released just three days after his suicide, Olshansky reportes on the program, but although she and the other attorneys at CCR had been told this by the U.S., they had been unable to notify him, because the government for two weeks had been blocking them from communicating with him. The government didn't inform him either.
Olshansky reports that there were a number of child captives "some as young as 7," who were held in a special center at Guantanamo called "Camp Iguana." She notes that the Geneva Conventions, to which the U.S. Is a founding signatory, require that children 12 and under be accorded special treatment in wartime, and not be treated as combatants or held as POWs.
Lindorff, in the program, lays out 10 reasons why Bush should be impeached, and lashes into Democratic Party leaders who have claimed impeachment would be "off the table" if the party were to win control of the House in November. He explains not only that members of Congress have an obligation, as part of their oaths to "uphold and defend the Constitution," to impeach for crimes against the Constitution, the Republic and the people of the U.S., but that impeachment is the perfect strategy for the November election, since 80 percent of Democrats, and over 50 percent of all voters, support the idea.
That's another thing you don't hear in the mainstream media.
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net
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
Wow Dave do you hawk you book now EVERY SINGLE DAY?
At least most of the time you hide it in a op-ed blog post and claim new info or that is relevant to some other event of the day.
30K suckers [meaning $60K profit for you and your parnter for a work of derivative speculative fiction] for an event that won't happen. I will ask the same simple question. "What will you do when the non GOP led congress in 2007 does not impeach GWB?"
Conning the left, I think PTB would even be embarrassed.
by
Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 153 comments)
on Thursday, August 31, 2006 at 1:13:44 PM
Well, actually, since you won't find the news about this book anywhere else, and since you won't find any reports anywhere about the childrens' detention unit at Guantanamo except in this story, I don't see what your problem is.
In fact as a "person of the left" I don't see anything wrong with letting people know about a news/public affairs program at which I and my co-author presented what we've know and learned about the president's crimes. Is that any worse than writing the book in the first place?
I guess you're suggesting that I shouldn't get paid for writing books and articles. Maybe that's your point.
Wait a minute. I don't get paid for writing articles for places like OpEd News and Counterpunch, come to think of it.
How am I supposed to support my family with such activities? Oh yeah, I remember. It's by writing my book. But I can't tell anyone about it, though, according to you, because that would be "shameless promotion."
Look, I'm proud of the book. So is Barbara. And we think it makes a major contribution to the impeachment debate and the impeachment movement. It'd be kind of silly if I didn't try to let people know about it, don't you think?
So go ahead and complain if you like. It would be better, though, if you do think we've got a usurper destroying our constitution, if you just let people know about the program, which I don't make a penny on. Then they can decide whether or not it's worth buying the book, which I do earn a little from.
Dave Lindorff
by
Dave Lindorff (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments)
on Thursday, August 31, 2006 at 1:51:33 PM
Dude, I am heading for Amazon. I'm with you on this one. We may make up a game plan as we go along while hiking in in the desert, but going into an Islamic nation with Islamic nations all around without proper reasons for it, no game plan during the invasion, lack of certified personnel, and absolutely no plan on getting out, what do you expect? Success? We don't even do that for 5 and under T-Ball.
Things need to change in Iraq. Today was a damnation of a day for the Iraqi's, and we are at fault. The only possible result of such nonsense is failure. But what do expect coning from a "less than professional" administration.
Darn right, you have a right to sell your book. Iraq can be added to the rest of Bush's life of failures. If it hadn't been for his daddy's money, he would be selling burgers at McDonalds.
by
Dale Hill (55 articles, 0 quicklinks, 97 diaries, 340 comments)
on Thursday, August 31, 2006 at 3:26:25 PM
so wait, you are proud of your smaless self promotion? I guess it goes with the whole Cindy Sheehan thing.
My point as you ignored, was that had it any basis , you would be invited to speak about it. Instead of mentioning it in every op-ed you write whether it is even related.
But keep ranting about how important it is, since more and more will just ingore you as a raving loony who is off his meds.
And to beg the question that you avoid, what will YOU do when no impeachment occurs in 2007...
by
Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 153 comments)
on Thursday, August 31, 2006 at 6:44:15 PM
David, You cannot win an arument with an ignorant man.
David, I have read your book. It is a great book and spot on. You cannot win an argument with an ignorant man. Ignore this blind, obedient fool. He is part of continually shrinking number of people that support Bush and the number of people that believe Bush should be impeached is now the majority. I am positive, and will bet him, a straight up $10, he has not even read the book!
As a matter of fact, I will send him the book, at my expense, if he will pry open his neocon, war-mongering mind long enough to read and absorb what you wrote!
The real problem is, David, that the case against Bush is long, complex and requires a high mental acumen to understand how serious this is. Critical-thinking people, like you and I, grasps these concepts. Ignorant nationalists and scurrilous flag-wavers can't leap beyond Duty, Honor, Country!
Impeaching Clinton sounded good to them because it was something uber-basic; an extra-marital affair. Complex, rule of law and Constitutional issues means nothing to someone who supports an incurious man who is proud of the fact he doesn't read.
You, and many others, are Patriots, David. Remember,
"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."
Don't stop, for it is the right and just thing to do!
by
Frank J. Ranelli (59 articles, 141 quicklinks, 27 diaries, 331 comments)
on Thursday, August 31, 2006 at 7:53:25 PM
David, You cannot win an argument with an ignorant man.
David, I have read your book. It is a great book and spot on. You cannot win an argument with an ignorant man. Ignore this blind, obedient fool. He is part of continually shrinking number of people that support Bush and the number of people that believe Bush should be impeached is now the majority. I am positive, and will bet him, a straight up $10, he has not even read the book!
As a matter of fact, I will send him the book, at my expense, if he will pry open his neocon, war-mongering mind long enough to read and absorb what you wrote!
The real problem is, David, that the case against Bush is long, complex and requires a high mental acumen to understand how serious this is. Critical-thinking people, like you and I, grasps these concepts. Ignorant nationalists and scurrilous flag-wavers can't leap beyond Duty, Honor, Country!
Impeaching Clinton sounded good to them because it was something uber-basic; an extra-marital affair. Complex, rule of law and Constitutional issues means nothing to someone who supports an incurious man who is proud of the fact he doesn't read.
You, and many others, are Patriots, David. Remember,
"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."
Don't stop, for it is the right and just thing to do!
by
Frank J. Ranelli (59 articles, 141 quicklinks, 27 diaries, 331 comments)
on Thursday, August 31, 2006 at 7:54:11 PM
and If FDR and LBJ did not get impeached for their actions, I don't see how GWB will be. Remeber that Executive Powers in a time of War (congress does not call it that nowadays , but the courts take it as such) means that his actions while infringing are legal. And just like FDR and LBJ the real damaging stuff won't be known till he is way out of office.
[Another historical trend of presidents, you notice how even Clinton defends certain presidential powers, there is a reason and it is partly self interest.]
As far as betting, yes please do place a bet with a bookie in england (there are several). I need the odds to go up a bit for me, for my 25K bet that it won't occur in 2007. [still having a problem framing the bet that way]
So fjr1966 what will you do when no impeachment process occurs in 2007? And what do you think of yourself when the person you belittle for his knowledge is right? Liberals never learn, if they do they are no longer as liberal as they once were.
/And yeah I was around when LBJ pulled his stunts. To this day I chat with Helen,his telephone receptionist, and reminisce about what was and what is reported.
by
Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 153 comments)
on Friday, September 1, 2006 at 8:33:43 AM
You admit you have not read the book, and then accuse me of, as a liberal, of never learning! You exhibit the very nature of the trait you profess to detest! Hypocrisy at its finest example! You claim to have studied history, but apparently not the facts. Important facts, such as the war in Iraq is illegal (on a magnitude of accounts) and based on a false speculation, trumped-up allegation, manipulated intelligence and shear, utter lies. Let's start with Colin Powell's dubious words and infamous speech to the UN? He admits it was wrong and he lied to the UN. Do you want to dispute that, too? Can you point us to the WMD's....I am sure Bush would like to know where they are, too!
You refer to England. Are you not even a US citizen?
That's quite a bit of specious ranting, without facts to back it up. Your pattern is discernibly simple and identifiable. When you can't make a lucid argument to support your point, which is not even clearly spelled out, you resort to rambling about other, past democratic presidents and their supposed misdeeds. David wrote a book, chock full of facts and evidence to support his opinion and what did you do? Attack the writer, not the facts! I know a polemic, shrill pundit named Ann Coulter, who does the same thing. Are you related? Sisters?
Let's stay on topic, shall we? David's book and its content. You read the book, you then come back here and tell us, in your opinion, whether, or whether not there is a legal argument, based on the U.S. Constitution and our laws, for impeaching the president. As Joe Friday said, "Just the facts ma'am, just the facts." See, you look like an utter fool attacking the author, before reading his work. It's the same as impugning a painter's work of art when you are blind!
One last item, the more I learn the more liberal and progressive I become. Your over-reaching, generalized, non-supportive, unfounded accusation clearly demonstrates your predilection for uncorroborated arguments and presumptive, irrational jump-to-conclusions that are false; illustrates just how out of touch your ability to draw a coherent read on a topic or person really is.
Get back to me after you finish the book.....
by
Frank J. Ranelli (59 articles, 141 quicklinks, 27 diaries, 331 comments)
on Friday, September 1, 2006 at 5:26:02 PM
I think vulturetx has a problem with the subject of the book and not the author. It seems he thinks anyone who criticizes the war is unpatriotic and anti-American. Vulturetx seems to be a real true Bush lover, but I just love his comments for he shows the ridiculous position of those who try to defend Bush by always attacking those who want to hear something other than the slop we keep hearing from the mainstream news organizations. If this book is causing such concern by the "for my hero Bush, right or wrong" crowd, I think I need to look into buying one for myself, too.
by
pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 940 comments)
on Friday, September 1, 2006 at 8:19:36 AM
"She notes that the Geneva Conventions, to which the U.S. Is a founding signatory, require that children 12 and under be accorded special treatment in wartime, and not be treated as combatants or held as POWs."
Funny thing is the Geneva Conventions as ratified by the US don't say this. They do say that children under 15 who have been combatants have to be houses separately and treated well. Which is what Camp Iguana was about.
But the only thing about age 12 is the wearing of identity discs. So when you make accusations based on inaccurate statements , you result is worth what again?
Is it Camp Iguana or even GitMo existence and ordered usage an impeachable offense? Nope historically it has been accpeted the enemy combatants can be interned for the duration until such time as someone wants to take repsonsiblity for them. Remember the cuban felons hanging out in US jails because Castro would not take them back?
As for I,peachment: Hell in only 5 months, I will be proven right, since if it does not happen at the opening sesion wrangling , it is unlikely to occur.
/Dave here is making serious bucks here hawking his book, Rob is wondering why he has to beg for donations. Yep another CF moment for liberals, if only localized.
by
Vulture (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 153 comments)
on Friday, September 1, 2006 at 10:10:53 AM
