Tags for This Article:

Impeachment (3103)  Impeachment (3103)  Bush Reasons To Dump Impeach (1865)  Bush Admin (1854)  Bush Crimes (1327)  Bush Liar-in-Chief (877)  Bush Co-Conspirators (721)  Lies Cheney (472)  Democracy (443)  Conspiracy (384)  Patrick Fitzgerald (11) 

Populum Tag Cloud
       Control Panel
Fine tune your search to access content
Articles
Diaries Products
Events All
All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs
From:
Month  Day   Year

To:
Month  Day   Year
Alphabet
Popularity
Count ON
Count OFF
This Level
Sub-levels

 

 

 

Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Add to My Group
November 22, 2007 at 08:59:02

Impeachment on the Thanksgiving Table

by Dave Lindorff     Page 1 of 2 page(s)

www.opednews.com

 

Tell A Friend

(0.0 from 0 ratings) View Ratings | Rate It

The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. So I stood at the White House briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby.

There was one problem. It was not true.

I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the Vice President, the President's chief of staff, and the President himself.

--Excerpt from Scott McClellan's forthcoming book "What Happened"
(Public Affairs Books, due out in April 2008)

With that one little statement, released on the Public Affairs Books website this week, all excuses for not impeaching President Bush and Vice President Cheney, not to mention indicting Cheney (who of course has no immunity from prosecution while in office), have evaporated.

Here is rock-solid evidence from a man who, as press secretary, was privy to the inner workings of the White House, of a vile conspiracy involving the two top men in the Bush/Cheney administration, as well as their top three staffpeople, to expose the identity of an important CIA undercover operative, Valerie Plame, and then, when caught, to obstruct a criminal investigation by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, into that crime.

Forget for a moment the administration's other high crimes and misdemeanors and acts of bribery and treason, though many, like defying laws passed by the Congress, or violating the Nuremburg Charter, are surely far more egregious. This particular set of crimes--conspiracy, obstruction of justice, lying, and of course the underlying crime of abuse of power and perhaps treason (since Plame's responsibility as a high-rankiing CIA operative was preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, particularly in the Middle East!)--is serious enough.

There is no way that American democracy can continue to survive, even in its current truncated form, if the Congress continues to duck this issue and pretend that it has "more important things to do," as Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her retinue of "leaders" in the House have continued to claim for an entire year in control of the Congress.

To keep impeachment "off the table," knowing that the president and vice president brazenly lied to the American people and to the Special Counsel's office about such a serious offense, is to make a mockery of the Constitution and the law.

Bush and Cheney must be impeached at this point if only to save school districts across the nation the cost of having to buy all new American history and civics texts, revised so as to remove all discussion of the notion of Constitutional checks and balances and the word "impeachment."

It is of course possible that the political reality is that Republicans in Congress have become such an antidemocratic conglomeration of authoritarian yes-men that they would defend their political leaders no matter what their crimes, and that thus impeachment would be a dead end, either in the House or certainly in the Senate. This, however, is no excuse for not calling the president and vice president to account in impeachment hearings in the House, where Democrats have a solid majority.

An impeachment hearing before the House Judiciary Committee, with full subpoena power granted to that committee, would lead to revelations and exposures far beyond that of Scott McClellan's, though putting McClellan under oath on national TV in such a hearing promises to be as enlightening and entertaining as was the testimony in 1974 before the same panel by Nixon White House attorney John Dean.

The critical importance of such hearings to the future of American democracy, and to public understanding of the nature of the coup that has been undermining that democracy should be obvious. It wouldn't matter what the vote was following such hearings. Certainly articles of impeachment would be voted out of the committee and sent to the floor of the House. Almost as certainly, the House would end up having to support those articles. So Bush and Cheney would at least stand impeached, probably with at least some Republican's voting for impeachment. They would probably also be forced, like President Clinton before them, to stand trial in the Senate--if Republicans didn't first succeed in convincing them to resign to spare their party a disaster at the polls next November.

Certainly it's possible that proponents of conviction in the Senate would not be able to convince the 16 or 17 Republican necessary to win a conviction and removal from office, but it wouldn't matter at that point. The Bush administration would stand condemned for all time as a gang of criminals and usurpers.

It's worth noting that following Clinton's impeachment and trial, which failed to remove him from office, the Oval Office has been off-limits to unchaperoned interns, and it is likely to be a long time before felatio is re-enacted under the Oval Office desk. Similar action against Bush and Cheney would make future Constitutional crimes equally unlikely for the same reason, even without conviction.

This would be even more true if Special Counsel Fitzgerald were to do his duty, as he clearly should, and reopen his Plame investigation with an indictment of Cheney, and with the naming of Bush, like Nixon before him, as an "unindicted co-conspirator."

 1  |  2

 

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

Contact Author
Contact Editor
View Other Articles by Author

 

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

NETSCAPE      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
7 comments

57Yo m I'm a "been there, done that! Bought the tee shirt,to hide the scars!" type of person Ive worked�many jobs from�a chicken slaughterer to managing a branch of a multinational and many jobs in between.Raised in colonial PNG Left School 16,Grad Hi school 22 Night School, University 36� BBus (majored in Psyche and Marketing), Dip Comp prog and project Mmnt.at 50 I've been in 48 different community org ,23 on board with 18 prez or deputy prez.First social campaign at 17 for the aborigine...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Andris57Yo m I'm a "been there, done that! Bought the tee shirt,to hide the scars!" type of person Ive worked�many jobs from�a chicken slaughterer to managing a branch of a multinational and many jobs in between.Raised in colonial PNG Left School 16,Grad Hi school 22 Night School, University 36� BBus (majored in Psyche and Marketing), Dip Comp prog and project Mmnt.at 50 I've been in 48 different community org ,23 on board with 18 prez or deputy prez.First social campaign at 17 for the aborigine...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Matter of Judgement

Much as I would like GWB/RC  removed from office and system to be given a good dose of cod liver oil to purge it of all their influence reality must make an entrance.

Your peice tends to make some assumptions that the DNC  wouldn't be so comfortable with. Firstly the book relalations are to my mind suspect and would need at least coroboration if not proof both of which are likely to be forth coming. what I suspect would happen would more heat than light. I can't see Bush and Co coperating. I think time would run out before a conclusion  could be reached. Then theres the political damage that would be inflicted particularly on the Dems specifically if things didn't go the way you predict. Keep in mind  only 30% of the population want impeachment.

What you're suggesting is a high risk strategy. If Bush and Co knew that some of the nominal dems from largely Republican seats were concerned about their seats  the villians my hold out for a Senate trial knowing that it'll never get legs.

When all said and done the 'evidence' that GWB/RC are guilty of  actual crimes are in legal terms circumstantial ,heresay and hardly objective  Proof.

In the Nixon case the proof was present so the two cases are not the same. 

by Andris (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 532 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 4:11:25 PM
 


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
Dave LindorffDave 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

A lot of facts are wrong in this comment

Polls show a MAJORITY of people favor Cheney's impeachment (54%) and that 45% favor Bush's impeachment, and that's with hardly any mainstream coverage of impeachable crimes by the two men (the Times and Post have yet to even report on McClellan's statement!). The highest public support for Clinton's impeachment ever got was 36 percent. Nixon's impeachment was opposed by the vast majority of Americans until his impeachment hearings were underway.

 As for impeachment "hurting" Democrats, that is not an argument that should even be made. It's not about what party gains, impeachment is about holding a president to account under the Constitution for abuses of power or violation of the rule of law. It's not a partisan matter.

 Finally, of course McClellan's statements should be proven. But the place to do that is under oath in an impeachment hearing, along with Andrew Card and Karl Rove.  What is the big f***ing deal? Hold impeachment hearings, put these bastards under oath on pain of perjury, and see what comes out. If they refuse to testify, or lie and get caught, lock them up for contempt. If bush comes out of it, so be it. But at least we'd have challenged his crimes.

 At least future presidents would think twice before emulating him.

  

by Dave Lindorff (310 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 150 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 5:47:55 PM
 


RETIRED CONSTRUCTION SUPT.MARRIEDOVER 60GOALS: MAKING THE PUBLIC AWARE OF JUST HOW CORRUPT THIS ADMINISTRATION REALLY IS, AND EDUCATING THE IGNORANT 30% 
GUY P. FRASERRETIRED CONSTRUCTION SUPT.MARRIEDOVER 60GOALS: MAKING THE PUBLIC AWARE OF JUST HOW CORRUPT THIS ADMINISTRATION REALLY IS, AND EDUCATING THE IGNORANT 30% 

examinator

  who the hell are you? are you yhe prophet from the dark side? your post sounds intelligent, but your facts need a little help

by GUY P. FRASER (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 60 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 6:18:03 PM
 


Single Parent
Concerned Citizen
Educational Activist
Telecom Consultant
Business Consultant
PR Consultant
Sales and Marketing Consultant
Website Owner
Non Partisan

Emmett SmithSingle Parent
Concerned Citizen
Educational Activist
Telecom Consultant
Business Consultant
PR Consultant
Sales and Marketing Consultant
Website Owner
Non Partisan

Outing Plame?

This is the least of the crimes committed by this pair and never mind the Constitutional violations. If they were from a country like, say, Bosnia, they would be tried for war crimes and hung and so would Congress for allowing it to continue.

by Emmett Smith (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 24 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 8:40:51 PM
 


Lynn Beckman is a freelance writer and political activist. She resides in Colorado with her husband and teenage son.
Lynn BeckmanLynn Beckman is a freelance writer and political activist. She resides in Colorado with her husband and teenage son.

Pelosi needs a big push

When I heard Scott McClellan's comments, I thought "this is just the last straw" Given that there are many people out there who feel the same way, we all need to flood Pelosi with Emails and phone calls and tell her just that. It's bad enough that the Dems are overlooking all the other crimes and nefarious acts perpetrated by this cabal, but enough is enough. How much money was spent on Fitzgeral's prosecution of Libby? And all for nothing, when Bush commuted his sentence. This gang of criminals has gone too far, and if Pelosi gets enough pressure, she'll have to do something.

by Lynn Beckman (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 27 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 8:56:59 PM
 


57Yo m I'm a "been there, done that! Bought the tee shirt,to hide the scars!" type of person Ive worked�many jobs from�a chicken slaughterer to managing a branch of a multinational and many jobs in between.Raised in colonial PNG Left School 16,Grad Hi school 22 Night School, University 36� BBus (majored in Psyche and Marketing), Dip Comp prog and project Mmnt.at 50 I've been in 48 different community org ,23 on board with 18 prez or deputy prez.First social campaign at 17 for the aborigine...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Andris57Yo m I'm a "been there, done that! Bought the tee shirt,to hide the scars!" type of person Ive worked�many jobs from�a chicken slaughterer to managing a branch of a multinational and many jobs in between.Raised in colonial PNG Left School 16,Grad Hi school 22 Night School, University 36� BBus (majored in Psyche and Marketing), Dip Comp prog and project Mmnt.at 50 I've been in 48 different community org ,23 on board with 18 prez or deputy prez.First social campaign at 17 for the aborigine...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Gentlemen

Perhaps my numbers are out ( I got them from OpedNEWS) sorry about that but the point still remains to get in you need to engage the top two standard deviations of the statistical spread of voters (66%) more if possible talk to any campaign manager.

It depends on which 54% were responding. The  nubers may not be evenly spread to carry 54% of seats. There is the intention differential that mean there is a well know difference between what people may say to pollster and when faced with having to do something this may be as much as 4-5% then there's other qualifications sample size, truthfulness, the questions, geographic, ethnicity, financial status, who did the tests and their bias, objective. In short no self respecting campaign would trust anything but their own numbers etc. We’ve got an election here in which case one party has been leading in the polls for 12 mths. But on the eve of the election a Murdock news poll shows the conservative candidate doing a miraculous turn around but the parties internally see it differently.

Then there's the Fact of continuity any organization's first duty is to maintain its existence. Ben Franklin said that political parties were an impediment to the people. Both parties will do what is necessary it the eyes of its apparatchiks to maintain otherwise they lose power. Parties suffer from the same lack of morality as do companies. i.e. people will do things to advance a companies profit (continuation) even though they know that it will not benefit the public (big tobacco). 

Pelosi will not risk the future of the Dems in her mind on a high risk strategy. Translation neither she nor the other Dems will commit political Hari Kari on an idealistic principal.

One can either ignore this, or as I prefer factor it in my expectation and find ways to turn it to my advantage. The party would correctly argue that all the idealism in the world is pointless unless you're in power and a premature attack would risk this.

Correct me if I’m wrong but Nixon had two things against him the facts were clear enough and all the stone walling in the world wouldn’t have stopped him being impeached. He knew there was hard evidence against him. In those days things were simpler. Bush claims all sorts of rights to presidential secrecy. I see court supreme battles.

Two the numbers in the Senate were against him. There are doubts in the DNC that they could carry the numbers.The context issue comes to mind that was then this is now things have changed Bush has defended off a couple attempts so far.

The book purveyor’s evidence must be seen as lacking credibility not to mention integrity. When you’ve got so much at stake today perjury charge is hardly a guarantee to smoke out the truth. 2Years on a celebrity prison farm then retirement Venezuela in luxury with a Bahamanian Bank account.  

 You need to understand that The Republicans believe they are on a mission and the mission must be defended at all costs. No one is denying that they should go but a don Quixotic charge isn’t a good option at this point. I suggest we concentrate on other options

I'm not saying I'm right and your wrong I'm simply saying that a little more pragmatism should be injected into your views

by Andris (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 532 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 8:57:53 PM
 


I am a 65 year old widowed grandmother who just got health insurance after more than two decades without it which is difficult with Diabetes, asthma and hypertension. One of my sons is severely developmentally disabled by autism due to lead paint poisoning. I have spent much of my life caring for ill and disabled family members and advocating on their behalf. 
Pat WilliamsI am a 65 year old widowed grandmother who just got health insurance after more than two decades without it which is difficult with Diabetes, asthma and hypertension. One of my sons is severely developmentally disabled by autism due to lead paint poisoning. I have spent much of my life caring for ill and disabled family members and advocating on their behalf. 

Pragmatism?

Being reasonable, being pragmatic is both Democrats' strength and, in the face of criminal power plays, its weakness. Our foundations and people are being attacked relentlessly and with the object of incremetally greater and greater control. Methinks we need less pragmatism and more chess strategy here. The corporatists have made this war, not peaceful, get along, live let live compromise.

by Pat Williams (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 82 comments) on Saturday, November 24, 2007 at 12:24:53 AM
 

 

7 comments

 

Tell A Friend

 


Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2008

Blog Ads

 

 

 

 

Most Popular Articles
in the Last 2 Days
(by Recommend Emails)

Loserville: Obama Is Channeling Kerry and Gore by Dave Lindorff

Are you ready for nuclear war? by Paul Craig Roberts

Fresh New Discovery - Can You Guess What This Photo Is? by Meryl Ann Butler

"Caroline: Pull a Cheney!" An Open Letter to Caroline Kennedy (head of the Obama VP search team) Posted by Stephen Fox

NSA MAY BE READING WINDOWS SOFTWARE IN YOUR COMPUTER by Sherwood Ross

The REAL John McCain by Mike Kuykendall

Mr. Bill: "OH NO, Fix the coast you broke, Shell Oil!" by Georgianne Nienaber

Brown's Gas ("HHO") : Clean, Cheap, and Suppressed Energy by Steve Windisch (jibbguy)

Russia to US: Checkmate! by William Helbig

New Zogby/Reuters Poll: Obama Down 5, in an Almost Perfect Storm by Rob Kall

Select Time
6 hrs 12 hrs
1 Day 2 Days
3 Days 1 Week
2 Weeks 1 Month
2 Months 3 Months
6 Months Last Year
Select Content
Articles Links
Diaries Members
Polls Events
All  
Select Popularity
Page Views
# of Comments
Recommend Emails