|
|
Tags for This Article:
Impeachment (3118) Impeachment (3118) Constitution In Crisis (443) Judiciary (259) Constitutional Rights (211) Constitutional Amendments (114)
|
Group(s): Democrats (unofficial)Add to My Group
The United States has been in a prolonged Constitutional crisis since the Supreme Court showed it had been corrupted by partisan politics when the Bush vs. Gore ruling was issued in December, 2000. The Bush Administration began by Republican politicians thumbing their noses at the rule of law. The past seven years have been an unending assault on Constitutional government, American political traditions and personal freedom. It is time to place impeachment fully on the table for the top members of the Bush White House and Cabinet. The appointment of Attorney General Gonzales should never have been approved by Congress. His record of distorting the truth in order to protect the political career of George W. Bush is the only real qualification he had when nominated. It was the reason he was appointed and the reason the appointment should have been soundly rejected. Gonzales has always been an advocate of radical legal theories that attack the essence of our Constitutional protections of personal freedom. The Attorney General holds legal theories that would give the President dictatorial powers. Bush, Cheney and Gonzales have resolutely claimed powers not given by the Constitution to the Executive Branch. These claims are essentially “high crimes” by their very nature. They subvert the American Constitution and border on treason. Claims that the President can place in prison any American citizen by declaring that person an enemy combatant, without court hearings, forever are criminal violations of Constitutional guarantees of personal freedoms. These claims are illegal bids for power, not granted by our Constitution, by Bush, Cheney and Gonzales. These legal theories are fascist in nature. All three need to be facing impeachment. Impeachment is designed to check corrupt, dictatorial members of the Executive and Judicial Branches of government. Bush has issued executive orders that negate laws passed by Congress like the Presidential Papers Act. The signing statements routinely and radically used by Bush to gut the intent of Congress concerning legislation are assaults on the Constitutional checks and balances and are illegal. Cheney’s claims that he does not have to comply with laws limiting the powers of members of the Executive Branch or Congress are illegal. His role in almost every scandal connected to the White House seems apparent but Cheney remains secretive and defiant. The power claims of Cheney are assaults on the rule of law and the US Constitution. Impeachment hearings are needed for Bush, Cheney and Gonzales for many reasons. All three are claiming Constitutional powers that are not Constitutional. All three have played major roles in subverting federal law enforcement and an independent judiciary. All three have deceived both the American public and Congress. All three are hiding their activities, using false national security and executive privilege claims to hide their law-breaking. Bush has demonstrated his willingness to use Presidential powers to keep his White House cronies from paying the costs of their illegal behaviors. Scooter Libby committed perjury to obstruct justice in federal investigation of White House operatives who broke the law by intentionally outing a covert CIA agent. Bush protected him. It appears that Bush and Cheney may have been directly responsible for the crime. The political firings of US Attorneys has been another issue where Presidential powers may be used to obstruct justice, hide the truth and subvert the rule of law. It certainly appears that Gonzales has committed perjury like Libby and for similar reasons. Presidential pardon powers do not apply to impeachment. Because Bush is willing to misuse his Presidential powers and the Supreme Court has been packed with radical, partisan Republican appointees, only impeachment hearings will reveal to the public the abuses of the Bush White House. Only impeachment will bring these powerful criminals to justice and preserve the Constitutional rule of law. www.DemocraticTalkRadio.com Stephen Crockett is co-host of Democratic Talk Radio and author of the Democratic Voices opinion column.
Richard Mynick is a US citizen who, despite the best efforts of the corporate media, noticed something disturbing about how the 2000 election was decided, & felt it augured poorly for democracy.
I agree 100%. This is all true. However, what conclusions should we draw from the fact that Democrats did not fight to prevent the confirmation of Gonzales & the 2 new Supreme Court Justices? And what conclusions should we draw, if Democrats refuse to wage a serious fight for impeachment of these criminals? by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1121 comments)
on Tuesday, July 31, 2007 at 9:53:03 PM
Stephen Crockett is co-host of Democratic Talk Radio and author of the Democratic Voices opinion column.
I am a Democrat I am really sick of you guys insulting Democrats. I am not spineless nor any of the insulting crap I hear from the anti-Democrats lurking on this site. Most of us posting and reading this site are Democrats. You are insulting us all over and over again. On behalf of all the Democrats here, "go Cheney yourselves." by
Stephen Crockett (127 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 113 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 6:08:25 AM
Hi Stephen I feel your pain. But everyone is entitled to their opinions. I personally can take the heat, but I must admit the anti-Democrat rhetoric is fairly thick here. I just wish that half that angst and energy was directed at the two major problems in this country, the Republicans, and their buddies in the right wing noise machine. The endless din about “spineless Democrats” is getting a tad repetitive. It’s not that they are doing the hard things necessary, it’s just that we get the criticism, and now we need to move on to what we can do to help give them their spine back. That means writing congress, not just posting here. by
John R Moffett (80 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 601 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 7:33:12 AM
I was a Democrat I have voted as a democrat since 1959 and am now looking for a strong independent to support. Not all Democrats are spineless but those that are now in Congress fit the profile to a tee. They sit on their hands and do nothing to curb the onslaught on the Constitution by the Bush administration. My own Congressman, a democrat, will not respond to emails or return calls and my Democratic Senator does the same. The newly elected Democratic Congress only holds go-no-where investigations and nothing changes. If that is not acting spineless I have no idea what is. by
walley (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 109 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 7:33:39 AM
Richard Mynick is a US citizen who, despite the best efforts of the corporate media, noticed something disturbing about how the 2000 election was decided, & felt it augured poorly for democracy.
It's not personal. It's a matter of analyzing a situation with clarity & intellectual integrity. Suppose someone said to you, with all the sincerity in the world, that he "really truly believes in his heart that the Republican Party can be reformed, so that it would serve the best interests of the American people, in the spirit of true democracy." Would you take such a person seriously? You would recognize that his faith was very touching, but that all the evidence demonstrates that his viewpoint is absurd. The Republican Party can't be "reformed," because at its core, it's simply a big-business party that for electoral purposes is skilled in appealing to racists, xenophobes, homophobes & religious fanatics. You could point to all the history since Reconstruction, to back up your rejection of this hypothetical person's faith in the RP. A serious look at the history shows that the Dems are no better. They are not "opponents" of Republicans; they are the R's partners. They don't "expose Republican crimes;" they help cover them up. You sometimes contribute guest essays for Robert Parry's great site. Have you read Parry's books? He documents meticulously how the Dems (notably Lee Hamilton) let the R's get away with the October Surprise of 1980, Reagan's crimes in Iran-Contra, Iraq-gate, & dozens of other Bush crimes. Moreover, the Dems have been full partners with R's in building the monstrous military-industrial complex, & in supporting criminal US interventions overseas. You assert that anti-Dems are "lurking on this site." What do you imagine makes your support of Democrats more valid than the views of those who see the party for what it is? We are not "lurking" here any more than you are. You're trying to spread illusions in Democrats. This is dangerous. They've already proved a thousand ways that they're incapable of standing up to Republicans, because they collaborate with Republicans. Why are you urging people to stay obediently supportive of a party that collaborates with the enemy? Above, I wrote that your article was accurate. It wasn't a Dem cheerleading piece; it admirably recognized the necessity of impeachment. Then I asked you an important question to which you haven't responded yet: what conclusions should be drawn, if the Dems refuse to move forward on a Bush-Cheney impeachment? As you note, the Constitution itself is on the line. But not only are the Democrats NOT defending the Constitution, they're protecting the very gangsters who are destroying it! Pelosi's "off the table" position is itself a fantastic betrayal, clearly violating her oath of office. When we see Dem leaders on TV, they are NOT explaining to the public that the Constitution is being dismantled. They are NOT telling the public that the US govt has committed monstrous war crimes in Iraq. Instead, they are talking business-as-usual talk about "hoping to work with the president on a bipartisan basis," and "changing course to achieve success in Iraq." When Libby walks, when Bush refuses to comply with subpoenas, there are fundamental constitutional issues involved. The Dem leaders are refusing to bring serious public attention to these issues. They refuse to call things by their proper names -- & in this way, block accountability for crimes already committed, & pave the way for further crimes. by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1121 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 10:45:39 AM
Hi Rich PS. My representatives are in Maryland, and are all quite liberal, so they are often on my side of the issues. by
John R Moffett (80 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 601 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 11:33:00 AM
Hi wwalley Have you actually called them? They do have people who answer the phone, and they actually have to listen to you. I should have said, "don’t write, call". by
John R Moffett (80 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 601 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 8:47:33 AM
Hi John Yes I have called them many times but end up either on hold or talking with someone who acts like the most important thing in their lives is to get me off the phone. I have also called the Democratic National Committee and our state committee and expressed my displeasure with their lack of response. All I get from them is that they will let the right people know. How would suggest giving the spineless a new spine? by
walley (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 109 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 9:08:06 AM
Also contact the media This is a work in progress. Progressives are way behind in the "squeaky wheel" game. The Republicans are very squeaky, and we need to catch up. For example, I wrote Dana Milbank at the Washington Post today for his article ridiculing the Democrats over impeaching Gonzales. I hope he gets lots of angry emails over it. by
John R Moffett (80 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 601 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 10:32:35 AM
About me: *I am a Christian. One who believes in the lord, but also respects science (and other peoples beliefs and non-beliefs too). ...and I have no need to add the prefix "True" before the word "Christian", because either you are telling the "Truth" or you are not. *I have been married for __ years. I have a wonderful wife and two wonderful kids. *My web site is the work of one person. *I am a private individual. *I am not funded by any group. *I sincerely value human life (dem...
Screw the Democrats John, what the hell good are the democrats if they offer nothing more than token opposition? And you know, I have noticed that you sure do work awful hard to protect and defend the democrat powers that be. Don't you want them to get off their asses and to do something? Wouldn't you like them to do the super important things that we voted them in for? I sure would. Now why don't you let us organize so that we can let the people we elected know that we expect them to do what they promised and what we elected them for? by
RCG (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 352 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 10:30:23 AM
All for it! What am I doing to stop you? If you get a good progressive, Green or even socialist candidate running for President, I'll vote for them. But that's 15 months away. What about doing something before that? by
John R Moffett (80 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 601 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 10:36:11 AM
Stephen Crockett is co-host of Democratic Talk Radio and author of the Democratic Voices opinion column.
Are you serious about electing reformers? Prove it! Stop bitching about the Democrats and show me your troops in Congress. The people complaining here about spineless Democrats are not getting anti-Right Wingers elected. They are just whinning away and pissing-off their potential allies... the much slandered Democrats. The Republican Party should be sending these anti-Democrats paychecks... Their actions really help the Bush Republicans and nobody else. Politically, they are suicidal and incapable of electing even a single member of Congress much less a majority. These anti-Democrats are defeatist when it comes to real political action... full of opinion not backed by any history of successful electoral action. by
Stephen Crockett (127 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 113 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 2:36:56 PM
Richard Mynick is a US citizen who, despite the best efforts of the corporate media, noticed something disturbing about how the 2000 election was decided, & felt it augured poorly for democracy.
Why are you running away from the points I raised above? I asked you a direct question twice. You're refusing to answer it. I'll repeat it a third time: What conclusions should be drawn, if the Democrats refuse to defend the Constitution by impeaching and prosecuting Bush & Cheney? You write, "The Republican Party should be sending these anti-Democrats paychecks..." -- This turns reality on its head! The RP should be sending paychecks to the Dems. It's Pelosi, Reid & Co.who are protecting Bush from impeachment. It's the Dems who refuse to tell the public straight out that 1) the War on Terror is a fraud & largely just a cover for stealing global oil resources through military aggression, and 2) Bush & Cheney are war criminals who are destroying the Constitution & creating the framework for a police state. You write, "Politically, they (Dem critics) are ... incapable of electing even a single member of Congress much less a majority." The Dems collaborate with the R's to limit the public choice to just 2 parties, both dominated by big business. If the duopoly didn't force the public to accept an outrageously undemocratic setup like this, there'd be plenty of public support for genuine political alternatives. In other words, other parties are "incapable" of electing members to Congress, only because the D's & R's make sure no one else has a chance. Do you think the Dems should be rewarded for that? First they collaborate with our enemies to rob us of any meaningful choice, then they demand that we reward them for it? Meanwhile, the D's collaborate with the R's on illegal wars, torture, dismantling of the Constitution, & in allowing multinationals to virtually dictate US policy. They roll over for stolen elections. Why exactly does such a performance deserve blind loyalty, in your view? by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1121 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 4:57:20 PM
Castro for El presidente At this point, I would rather have Castro as President. And why not, This has turned into a banana republic with a corrupt dictator. At least Castro can speak "a language" and is almost dead. by
Gallaher (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 537 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 2:43:37 PM
About me: *I am a Christian. One who believes in the lord, but also respects science (and other peoples beliefs and non-beliefs too). ...and I have no need to add the prefix "True" before the word "Christian", because either you are telling the "Truth" or you are not. *I have been married for __ years. I have a wonderful wife and two wonderful kids. *My web site is the work of one person. *I am a private individual. *I am not funded by any group. *I sincerely value human life (dem...
Do you want me to compile a dossier? John, you have been very active trying to stifle people who are unhappy with the democrats who lied to us (to get elected) and are not doing their jobs. {although, you called it something to the effect of stopping the squabbling) You have been active defending these democrats as well. You have also shot down people who dare to say (the truth) that we have been lied to about 9/11. You have done all these things and more. by
RCG (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 352 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 7:26:06 PM
About me: *I am a Christian. One who believes in the lord, but also respects science (and other peoples beliefs and non-beliefs too). ...and I have no need to add the prefix "True" before the word "Christian", because either you are telling the "Truth" or you are not. *I have been married for __ years. I have a wonderful wife and two wonderful kids. *My web site is the work of one person. *I am a private individual. *I am not funded by any group. *I sincerely value human life (dem...
No, I will not shut up about being lied to and tricked Stephen Crockett - Prove it! Stop bitching about the Democrats and show me your troops in Congress. The people complaining here about spineless Democrats are not getting anti-Right Wingers elected. They are just whining away and pissing-off their potential allies... the much slandered Democrats. The Republican Party should be sending these anti-Democrats paychecks... Wow, there is so much wrong with what you said, I don't know where to begin. First of all, No, I will not shut up about being lied to. Second, I worked hard to get these people elected not because they are democrats - not because I liked the way they looked - but because I expected them to do what they said they would do. Anyhow, I'm not a professional paid blogger, so I have to stop now to go to work to "keep food on my family". But now this - - no amount of insulting/of calling me whiner, saying that I'm spineless etc. will stop me I will not keep quiet. P.S. why are you so angry and afraid to let us have open discussion? by
RCG (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 352 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 7:32:23 PM
About me: *I am a Christian. One who believes in the lord, but also respects science (and other peoples beliefs and non-beliefs too). ...and I have no need to add the prefix "True" before the word "Christian", because either you are telling the "Truth" or you are not. *I have been married for __ years. I have a wonderful wife and two wonderful kids. *My web site is the work of one person. *I am a private individual. *I am not funded by any group. *I sincerely value human life (dem...
correction oops. I meant to say, "But know this" by
RCG (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 352 comments)
on Wednesday, August 1, 2007 at 7:35:27 PM
|
|
