The impeachment movement, which has been building steam since the November election, got a big boost this morning when the Vermont Senate overwhelmingly passed a resolution calling for the US Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings against President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
The 16-9 vote, which saw the Senate’s six Republicans joined by only three Democrats, will make it difficult for Vermont House Speaker Gaye Symington, a Democrat who has opposed the impeachment resolution drive, to keep the measure from being voted on the House floor. Symington has been arguing against such a resolution, claiming it would be “divisive.”
The vote in the state senate was a huge victory for grassroots Democratic activists, who had been forced over recent months to overcome opposition to impeachment from the national Democratic Party leadership, and from their own state’s Democratic Congressional Delegation. Leading Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), have been arguing that impeachment could hurt Democratic prospects among independent voters in the November 2008 elections. But impeachment activists have countered that the president and vice president have violated the law and undermined the Constitution, and that it is inappropriate to let strategic and tactical interests of the Democratic Party enter into the decision on whether to impeach.
To get around opposition from leading Democrats, Vermont’s impeachment activists organized a statewide grassroots campaign to have as many towns as possible endorse impeachment in resolutions introduced at the annual town meetings that are the primary form of governance in most of the state’s municipalities. In the end, 39 towns voted for impeachment resolutions in their annual meetings in February. This sent a strong message to state legislators about the mood of the voters in the state. In the end, that message trumped pressure from Washington.
"This gives an immeasurable boost to the national push for impeachment, and the timing could not be better, “ said David Swanson, a leader of the national impeachment movement who runs a website at www.afterdowingstreet.org. Swanson noted that Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), a candidate for the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, is preparing to introduce a bill of impeachment against the Vice President Cheney next Wednesday. And adds that impeachment groups are planning coordinated events all over the country on April 28th http://www.a28.org He said, “What just happened in Vermont went down exactly the way things should in a democracy. Citizens raised their voices, passed local resolutions, and demanded that their state senators act. The hard work of Dan DeWalt, Ellen Tenney, and so many other Vermonters is beginning to pay off. Vermont may be remembered as the state that saved the Republic."
The mass movement for impeachment in Vermont has also had its impact on the local media there, which in turn may have pushed the state’s senators to act. On April 13, a week before the senate vote, the states third-ranked newspaper, the Brattleboro Reformer, ran an editorial headlined “Impeach Bush or Get Out of the Way.”
The paper wrote: There will be a time when future generations will look at us and wonder why President Bush and Vice President Cheney were not removed from office.
They will look at us and question why, when confronted by the most corrupt and incompetent administration ever witnessed in the United States, nothing was done to stop Bush and Cheney.
They will look at the craven behavior of the Democrats, too afraid to take on the president when it mattered. They will look at the Republicans, so intoxicated with power that they backed their president to the hilt, even as he ran this country off a cliff. They will look at the press, and how too many journalists were cowed into parroting the words of the administration. They will look at the voters, and shake their heads in disbelief that a number of Americans voted for all this -- the electoral equivalent of the chickens voting Colonel Sanders president.
And they will look at Vermont, and how a bottom-up impeachment effort with broad support ran into a brick wall of indifference in Montpelier as well as Washington.
The editorial pointedly attacked House leader Symington and Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin, saying: History will not look kindly on House Speaker Gaye Symington for her insistence that her chamber must focus on "important matters" and that the House "does not have the time" to deal with impeachment.
History will not look kindly on Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin, who has talked loudly about impeaching Bush and Cheney, but won't pursue the issue as long Symington says no.
The grassroots and media pressure clearly worked on Shumlin, who had long insisted he supported impeachment, but that there “wasn’t time” for an impeachment resolution. Shumlin allowed the vote today, and it sailed through, belying concerns about time. Now the pressure shifts to Symington.
The Vermont Senate vote carries enormous significance. If it is followed by a similar vote in the Vermont House, where a similar resolution has 20 sponsors, Vermont will be the first state in the nation to have a joint resolution calling for Congress to begin impeachment of the president.
One newspaper, the Vermont Guardian, reports that House impeachment backers plan to spend the next few days collecting signatures from fellow representatives to introduce an identical resolution next Wednesday in their chamber. Says State Rep. Dave Zuckerman, “We will take the same language the Senate passed today and turn it in Tuesday afternoon, which gives people around the state time to call their representatives and ask them to sign it; we would then have it on the calendar for Wednesday and the speaker will either let it be voted on or have it sent to committee.” He added, “Many of us are quite pleased they took the vote, but it’s clear that it only happened because citizens got involved.”
Under Thomas Jefferson’s Manual for Rules of the House, such a joint resolution, should it pass, is an alternative route to impeachment, and would require the House Judiciary Committee to initiate an impeachment hearing to determine whether grounds for impeachment of the president and vice president exist. It would no longer be possible, in other words, for Speaker Pelosi to continue blocking impeachment and intimidating representatives from filing impeachment bills.
It would also be a strong signal that the American public wants impeachment.
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
Pelosi belongs in the cell right next to Bush & Cheney.
When you aid & abet criminals, you are complicit in their crimes & you, too, deserve to be judged & punished accordingly. Pelosi's obstruction of the various valiant grassroots efforts to restore accountability to our government is nothing less than the "aiding & abetting" of dangerous criminals.
I certainly hope the Vermont measure succeeds. But it should be clearly appreciated that if it succeeds, it does so AGAINST the best efforts of the Democratic Party.
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1120 comments)
on Friday, April 20, 2007 at 1:47:03 PM
Until the main stream starts doing and saying things like this, it will go nowhere. We need to stop focusing on the expected, like the Vermont State Senate voting for Impeachment, GOLLY! and Dennis Kucinich bringing articles of impeachment in the house. (What a shock!). We need to be more explicit in explaining to the mainstream the extent of the war crimes of these bastards, why it will effect them in the end, and THEN what we can do about it.
by
Peggy McCann (18 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 34 comments)
on Friday, April 20, 2007 at 5:21:08 PM
Thanks for an inspiring article. I'll save it for reference. Can you expand on this paragragph?
Under Thomas Jefferson’s Manual for Rules of the House, such a joint resolution, should it pass, is an alternative route to impeachment, and would require the House Judiciary Committee to initiate an impeachment hearing to determine whether grounds for impeachment of the president and vice president exist...
My question is, can the bicameral passage of an impeachment resolution in just one state require the US House of Reps to open impeachment hearings, or is there some minimum number of states requiered?. Also, is Jefferson's "Manual..." accepted as law in the HR?
I look forward to opening up your website, "thiscantbehappening"
Thanks,
Michael Nolan
Taunton, MA
by
Michael Nolan (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments)
on Friday, April 20, 2007 at 5:27:37 PM
"In our view, the people of Vermont want us to focus our attention on such issues as ending the war in Iraq, protecting the needs of our veterans, raising the minimum wage, addressing the crisis of global warming and providing health care to all of our citizens."
And how exactly do you "end the war in Iraq," which, by the way, would be a major part of "protecting the needs of our veterans," if you have a president that flatly refuses to even consider any policy but his own open-ended farce, which is a proven monumental failure?
YOU IMPEACH THE SON OF A BITCH. HE IS IGNORING THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE AND DEFILING OUR CONSTITUTION. HE HAS LEGALIZED TORTURE. HE HAS ELIMINATED HABEAS CORPUS. HE CONTINUES TO ILLEGALLY HOLD PRISONERS WITHOUT CHARGES, TRIAL OR ACCESS TO COUNSEL. HE HAS LIED TO CONGRESS (A FELONY). HE HAS BRAZENLY ADMITTED TO ILLEGALLY SPYING ON AMERICAN CITIZENS AND PROMISED TO KEEP DOING IT. HE HAS PROFESSED NON-EXISTENT AUTHORITY TO IGNORE LAWS PASSED BY CONGRESS AS HE SEES FIT. HE STARTED AN ILLEGAL WAR OF AGGRESSION, BASED ENTIRELY ON LIES, THAT HAS KILLED 3300 OF OUR OWN TROOPS AND NEARLY THREE QUARTERS OF A MILLION INNOCENT IRAQIS. IF WE DO NOT REMOVE THIS FELON, THIS TRAITOR, THIS MURDERER FROM OFFICE AND PUT HIM IN PRISON WHERE HE BELONGS, WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT US?
I heard Sanders say on the radio this afternoon that "We don't have the votes. It's not gonna happen."
Wrong answer Bernie. Wrong goddamn answer. That's a flat out refusal to do the job that the people of Vermont hired you to do and it's un-fu**ing-acceptable. The evidence against this entire administration is beyond overwhelming.
Last time I checked, "we don't have the votes" doesn't fall into the category of honoring your sworn oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. If you don't have the votes, you work your ass off to go out and get them. Nobody is saying it will be easy. But it's your JOB, Bernie. It's what you get paid for.
If you, Mr. Leahy and Mr. Welch aren't up to the task, perhaps you all need to step aside to make room for people who are.
by
John Perry (31 articles, 33 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 81 comments)
on Friday, April 20, 2007 at 7:18:42 PM
Bernie Sanders is a weasel if there ever was one. They didn't have the votes when bills were submitted to impeach Nixon. The Republicans were backing Nixon to the hilt, and the Dixiecrats were not going to rag on him either. But once the hearings got going, he went down like a rock. That's what would happen to Bush, too, but you have to start the process by filing impeachment bills. Sanders knows that but he's become just another of Pelosi's stooges, and doesn't have the ganas to admit what he's become.
by
Dave Lindorff (319 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 152 comments)
on Friday, April 20, 2007 at 9:00:47 PM
Hi John .. I hope you don't mind, but I was so impressed by your letter that I posted it on my blog! (with credits to the author of course!) It's refreshing to hear someone who speaks plain english, and gets to the point without writing an entire novel ! well done !
and BACK IT UP. Backing it up is the problem, because this was brought up once in Michigan to impeach to, and it was thrown down, gee, I wonder why ? I have not seen such a bunch of cowards in my life. NEVER <<
I stand up to them more than the worthless states do, just in emails. I know what is at stake and dont care, why should they ? Cuz they are cowards. Cant face it.
by
Katarina Olszkea (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 35 comments)
on Friday, April 20, 2007 at 9:52:45 PM
It's getting harder to accept from those that say that impeachment is a mistake that they are sincere or that thay are our friends or that they mean what they say.
That is, I'm finding it hard to believe that anyone who advocates that impeachment is too divisive, or distracting, or in some other way damaging to the nation and the best interests of its people, is not merely pretending to be something he or she is not. We know already that there are minions for the right in Democrat clothing who say such things.
My point is not that they exist. My point is that the other kind of person, the one who is imputed to genuinely believe such things, may *not* exist.
America can't take another Watergate, huh? Watergate was about the last healthy thing that the American federal government has done, and it was the last shred of evidence that it had the decency and grit to take the high road and willingly hold itself up to any standard of decency. What America can't afford is another Iran-Contra. But it's just had another with Plamegate: focus the blame on somebody who was taking orders from the top, like North and Poindexter in the one case and Libby in the other, and then reverse or pardon their convictions.
by
Yaybob (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 175 comments)
on Saturday, April 21, 2007 at 7:21:24 AM
Greenback patriots get carte blanche to continue lawlessness
When Democrats failed to Impeach Ronald Wilson Reagan for conducting a covert and illegal war against Nicaragua, they opened the doors for Bush and the rabid right to illegally invade Iraq. The same authoritarian chicken hawks who promoted an Imperial Presidency under Reagan, are doing the same for Bush. By taking impeachment off the table, the Democratic leadership is giving greenback patriots carte blanche to continue their lawlessness and war profiteering in the future.
How is it that law and order obsessed Republicans can so zealously prosecute pot growers but ignore incredibly rich white collar criminals who lie and bully us into an illegal war? Which is the greater crime, growing pot or causing the deaths of perhaps a half million people? Are Americans too stupid to see the outrageous double standard imposed on us by the establishment?
If punishment is the only way to deter crime, how can the elite be exempt from punishment without undermining respect for the law among the "little people?" Leaders deserve our respect only to the extent that they "enforce the laws evenhandedly. Those that don't, encourage lawlessness and deserve our contempt.
.
by
rabblerowzer (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 227 comments)
on Saturday, April 21, 2007 at 7:25:21 AM
I don't understand the "divisive" bullshit. What could be more divisive than having mad-men at the head of government?
If you found a burglar in your house would you let him stay knowing he's got to leave eventually or would you take action to get him out ASPA?
Pelosi and any other politician panning the impeachment of these criminals are doing nothing but aiding and abetting said criminals. How can we claim to be a nation of laws if we allow the very people that execute and legislate said laws to break them with impunity?
Get behind Kucinich's impeachment of cheney - call your reps!
by
Mr M (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1254 comments)
on Saturday, April 21, 2007 at 7:28:19 AM
