Bush Must Be Impeached Now!

If there is one thing that Dennis Kucinich has, it's the courage to tell the truth, even when the deck is stacked against him. In this case he has an entire Congress (or most of them) that seem to want go along to get along. It will be a cold day in hell when the Articles of Impeachment that he delivered in Congress last night, all 35 of them, ever get out of the Committee where they will sit on them until the new elections , mainly because the majority of Democrats in the House have no sense of justice and of course, no spine.

I was glued to C-Span last night. I was mesmerized by the litany of abuses that this sitting President has perpetrated on not only the people of America, but the World. Step by step, Kucinich meticulously brought every charge against George W. Bush and backed those charges up with times, dates and testimony from Administration insiders. This Congressman has done his homework; there was not a single thing I believe he missed. There were a few things that I didn't even know this President was responsible for, and I follow him like a hawk.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich read each charge in the same way. He always invoked the phrase that Bush failed to live up to his oath and protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. He ten went to Article 2, section 3 that he must he must faithfully execute the laws of the land. Rep. Kucinich went on to make 35 charges against the President. He mentioned the flawed intelligence leading up to the Iraq War that The President had prior knowledge of and he used this flawed knowledge to deceive Congress. He talked of the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) which issued White Papers with fraudulent information that Iraq was manufacturing nuclear weapons.

Kucinich also brought up as an article of impeachment, the fact that Bush had known about the National Intelligence Estimate that Iran had stopped their nuclear weapons program in 2003, yet he continued to claim that they were close to manufacturing a nuclear weapon, even though they knew that this information had been discounted by US intelligence.

The Articles' of Impeachment numbered 35. Each was more damning than the one before. He made the case that of this Administration's systematic deception that was aimed directly at the American people so that this Administration could pursue what it thought appropriate, regardless of the laws of the United States.

You will be able to see the entire broadcast of Rep. Kucinich's appearance very soon. I watched it live for over three hours. Everything from the President's cover-up of Global Warming, to the NSA spying on American citizens was mentioned. The case to me was rock solid. There were so many abuses of power of the Bush Administration that even if the judiciary committee threw out half of the articles of impeachment, there would be more than enough evidence to remove Bush from office.

This MUST be done so that Bush cannot pardon the people in his administration. He must be removed from office to show the American people that we will never suffer another law-breaking tyrant in the Executive Branch. His Impeachment proceedings against Vice-President Cheney are still in the Judicial Committee. Why? When is Congress going to take their Constitutional Oversight responsibilities seriously? To this writer, it seems that we don't have on dysfunctional branch of government, we have two. Congress needs to wake up and go to work. Even in this election cycle they still have an obligation to do their jobs that we pay them for. The things that I heard last night, again and again, made me quite disgusted with my government. This has got to stop, and today is as good a day as any.

We know that the Republicans will try to stop this impeachment proceeding. The question I have for the Republicans is how can they stop these proceedings in good conscience when they understand the number of laws that this President has broken?  Is it good government to let "one of your own" willfully flaunt the laws of this nation and thumb his nose at the Constitution? That would be a travesty. It would not bode well for these Republicans in their election efforts now that the truth has been told. We need to get past this criminal administration and bring the rule of law back to this country. We are viewed by the World as a "Rogue State", a country that willfully ignores the Geneva Conventions and The World Court. This American has been ashamed of his nation's performance over the last seven years. I'm sure that many Americans other than this one are feeling the same way. At this particular point, your party affiliation should not enter the picture. What is wrong is wrong and that should be the standard, regardless of the office one holds. This is a country of law. When those laws are broken and circumvented, we lose the basic principles of whom and what we are. President Bush should be held to the same standard that we hold all Americans. To do less would impugn our reputation and make America a nation that let's itself be dominated by lawbreakers.



Display:


Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (none / 0)

This is total fantasy. Why are you wasting breath and emotion on it. There are more important things to talk about.


by ottovbvs on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:10:49 PM EST

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (2.00 / 2)

Not a beleiver in accountability, eh?


Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove.
by fogiv on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:20:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (none / 0)

yes a total believer but we have as much chance of bringing Dubya to justice as Stalin, so why waste time. The guy is reviled by 70% of the country, he's going to get no respect outside of nutcase Republicans. Not good but realism. And wasting time on impeachment bs gains us no converts in the country although it may make the leftist democrats feel good. Hardly a sufficient reason for wasting time on it.  


by ottovbvs on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:26:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Doesn't mean we can't have the debate (2.00 / 1)

Even if the impeachment won't go through, if we go into it knowing that outcome, we can force Republicans to tie their fate in November to Bush even more closely.

I'm of mixed feeling on this, but it is a debate I think the American people would like to see.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:30:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Doesn't mean we can't have the debate (none / 0)

Even if the impeachment won't go through, if we go into it knowing that outcome, we can force Republicans to tie their fate in November to Bush even more closely.

I can't express how much I disagree with this tactic.  This is Karl Rove, Ken Starr stuff--using the impeachment of a president as leverage in an election.  Using the power of government for partisan ends.

I support Obama for president because I believe him when he says he's not into this shit.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 01:51:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The difference (none / 0)

Bush is actually complicit in what ammount to capitol crimes and treason.

Bill lied about oral sex.

There is something to be said for applying political pressure in a situation like this, vs. a situation like that.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:57:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I think your terms are imprecise. (none / 0)

Capital crimes, as in ones that merit the death penalty?  Doubt it.  Treason?  Really?  Treason.  Like giving aid and comfort to our enemies in a time of war, or giving away military secrets to another country.  Doubt it.

Look, impeachment is for crimes, like things that are against actual U.S. law.   Absent some kind of smoking gun, wherein Bush is on tape saying Well Dick, you know we really only want to invade Iraq to line our pockets through oil revenues, the Iraq invasion was not a crime.  It was disastrous policy.

The only things that would really be impeachable would be actual, proven corruption (like GWB paying or taking bribes) or some hard connection of him personally overseeing use of government power for political ends.  And using impeachment as a tool to go on a fishing expedition for evidence, or for political effect in an election year, is to my mind an execrable, Rovian tactic.

Almost everything in those articles is bad policy, bad governance, incompetence, bad politics.  The remedy for that is the ballot.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:10:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Humm (none / 0)

It's not treason to expose an undercover secret agent, especially for no greater reason than to extract payback on someone who opposed an unjust invasion?  Is that not giving aid and comfort to enemies in a time of war?

The invasion itself was a tremendous boon to our enemies, and one that even a schmoe like me sitting in Minneapolis knew would inflame and drastically increase the recruitment of terrorists.

Bob Woodward reported in April, 2004 that Bush was planning on invading Iraq within 5 days of 9/11 and very probably before that... maybe from the day he took office.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/1 5/60minutes/main612067.shtml

I don't understand how anyone can believe that this is just "disasterous policy" as opposed to a planned and coordinated scam designed to get us into an unprovoked war that led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands.  That is what I call "treason."  If that isn't the official word for it, then maybe it should be.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:37:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Humm (none / 0)

It's not "just" disastrous policy.  It was monumentally disastrous policy.  One of the greatest blunders in our country's history.  Unfortunately, the Congress had an opportunity to stop it and didn't.  The tactics used to sell the war were highly unethical, but that's politics.  Unless we can prove he committed a crime, he won't be impeached.

You write, "that is what I call "treason."  If that isn't the official word for it, then maybe it should be."  Well, sure, maybe, but it's not.  That's the difference between voting someone out of office and impeaching and convicting him.  You can vote them out because something they did is as bad as treason.  You can only impeach them if what they did is treason.

My real points are these.  1) He can't realistically be impeached without proof he committed an actual crime.  2) Our chance to remove him from office and undo the work of his administration was in November, 2004.  3) Using impeachment as either a tool to find evidence or as a way to make some kind of symbolic gesture is, I think, a shameful tactic.

Thanks for the back and forth.  I didn't mean to come into this diary and hate all over it; I just feel strongly about impeachment being a bad idea.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 04:00:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yeah (none / 0)

I am not totally sold on the idea of impeachment myself, as I've mentioned, and definitely not for it in terms of shaking the tree and seeing what drops out; I'd only want to do it if something had already fallen out of the tree or is such low hanging fruit that a toddler could pick it.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 04:09:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry to keep harping (none / 0)

/ in what ammount to capitol crimes and treason./

This is what I disagree with.  They "amount to" crimes and treason--maybe.  Maybe.  That's a leap, a metaphor.  "These policies are so bad that it's as if they're criminal."  Impeachment is for concrete crimes.  Nixon wouldn't have been impeached if there hadn't been a tape of him ordering an obstruction of the FBI's investigation of Watergate--that's a crime.  Clinton wouldn't have been if he hadn't lied to the grand jury--that's also a crime.

You'd have a very tough time proving that Bush himself personally committed a crime.  Like I keep saying, the actions in those articles are bad policy.

Okay, sorry for the rant, I'll stop harping.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:24:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Doesn't mean we can't have the debate (2.00 / 1)

I understand your disagreement with using it as a tool to win an election, especially since we do not need it as the Republican party is falling apart and have an unwanted candidate.

However, something that hasn't been brought up in this thread, but Kevin spoke about, is the theory that Kucinich had obviously been working on this and held onto to it until it was apparent BushCo was going to go into Iran.

Fallon was booted for objecting to Iranian war,  New "info" about how Iranians are training and supplying terrorists to kill troops in Iraq (no proof that weapons recently found linked to Iran, thoguh htat story was swept under the rug), Air Force just OK'd some bombing plans, and the sabers are rattling in Israel.

The forecsts predicts in the minimum some quick in and out bombings of Iran.  Could lead to another war.  Hence initiation of Impeachment


Democrat for the democratic nominee
by KLRinLA on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:05:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Doesn't mean we can't have the debate (none / 0)

Okay.  Even so, I think it's a bad idea.  If Kucinich wants to stop an imminent war with Iran, there are more effective ways to do so.  Pass a bill refusing to fund any operation in Iran.  Pass a bill defunding the Iraq war.  Pass a bill requiring that Congressional monies be spent only in Afghanistan or to find Al Qaeda members.  
Use the House!  Get a coalition!  Convince your colleagues!  Convince the public!

People may disagree.  I find impeachment a cheap political stunt, a symbolic and metaphorical way of expressing disgust with the Bush administration.  We had our chance to impeach him in November 2004, and we failed.  Them's the breaks.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:17:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Doesn't mean we can't have the debate (none / 0)

I didn't know there was a statute of limitations on impeachment.


by JustJennifer on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:18:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Doesn't mean we can't have the debate (none / 0)

I meant "impeach" as in "get him out of office."


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:26:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Doesn't mean we can't have the debate (none / 0)

I don't think it is a cheap poitical stunt, rather a recordation of the events that took place in this time and a recognition of the travesties committed by this administration in order to restore integrity back in our government and to guide our future citizenry.  

I don't find the idea of impeachment political at all, rather a valuable American tool given to us by our founders to use in a situation such as this.  I think you find it political because of what the Rpublicans did with it, yeah impeachment for blojobs is political, (though I really don't assume to know what you think).  Was Nixon's impeachment political?  possibly but I think the country was severely taken aback by his deception.  Nixon is like Mother Teresa compared to Bush.

That's my take on it


Democrat for the democratic nominee
by KLRinLA on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:32:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Doesn't mean we can't have the debate (none / 0)

You may think it but there are tons of polls to show the American people have NO interest in pursuing it.


by ottovbvs on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:17:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

True enough (none / 0)

Like I've said before, I'm not entirely sold on the course of action.  I would like it to eat headlines for a week and then be voted down.

The historical record needs to say that we at least gave it a shot.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:58:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Doesn't mean we can't have the debate (none / 0)

Yeah, the same American people who elected George Bush.  Well, they elected him once at least.

Surely you realize that the American people, for the most part, want whatever they are convinced they want.  If the MSM decided to push for this to happen and they hammered on it as much as they have hammered on the primaries I bet you the polls would say something different.


by JustJennifer on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:23:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (2.00 / 2)

there is nothing more important to think about.


by citizendave on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:31:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (2.00 / 3)

While it is true that impeachment is ridiculously unlikely; I do agree with the diarist that this should be covered and discussed more than it has been.  If not for impeachment itself, at least to highlight and formalize the myriad crimes of this administration.

By bringing these injustices to light, it should cause more people to question why there was no accountability, and by doing so, challenge the status quo and power structure that has allowed these crime to go unpunished by a Democratic Congress.

George W. Bush damned well should have been impeached, and I'm among those royally pissed off at Pelosi et al for protecting their politcal interests instead of protecting this nation.  And the more people who get pissed off, the more likely something will change.


Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:44:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (none / 0)

To what end. To prove to middle of the road indies and mild Republicans that the Democratic party has it's head up its butt!


by ottovbvs on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:19:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (2.00 / 1)

Democrats only just gained control in aught six, and with Leiberman the Hawk, Dems never had true control.  So, I don't think this will give anyone ammo against dems, in fact, if we don't at least make a good-faith attempt to restore some f'n respect to the laws of this land, Dems will look like the fraidy pussy cats the Repubs say we are.

I agree with pursuing this.  I don't see how Americans don't want this to move forward... a waste of time? Have we become so f'n apathetic and lazy as to just say, let's forget about what happens when you let extremists into the office, just forget about it.  Yeah, History will never repeat itself if we just forget about it, right?

Fuck that.  Restore accountability.  If we don't then our Constitution is really just a piece of paper with no power.  We as citizens have had our rights curbed, Congress lost it's equal footing in the branches of governemnt, and apparently, according to Cheney, the VP is a 4th branch of gvt, accountable to no one.

It's "We the people", not "I'm the decider", we need to set this precedent.  


Democrat for the democratic nominee
by KLRinLA on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:48:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (none / 0)

The indies & mild Repubs already think the Dem party has its head up its butt, or they'd be Democrats.  (Not to mention they'd be correct in this case.)

No, the purpose would be to raise enough of a stink that mainline party operatives would have more (if only incremental) reason to fear being challenged by progressive candidates who favor better accountability to the wishes of their constituents, not to mention to the Constitution.


Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:53:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (none / 0)

I agree with everything but the "more important" part and it makes me sad.


Government derives its power from those that it governs.
by lockewasright on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:56:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (2.00 / 1)

More important things to discuss than protecting our Constitution and bringing Bush and Cheney to justice!  There are over 4000 graves out there that beg to differ with you!  Nothing is more important not Obama being President, not the Democrats controlling Congress, not the high price of oil, not National Health Care, not the Economy and certainly not your whinsical attitude towards the only thing that does matter!  I owe it to those brave soldiers to waste my breath and emotion protecting the one thing they died to protect.  Otherwise what does supporting the troops mean?  They have shown their courage and sacrificed all,  we can do no less!


by orionwest on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 04:19:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

35 articles (2.00 / 6)

#1: Creating a secret propaganda campaign to manufacture a false case for war against Iraq

#2 Falsely, Systematically, and with Criminal Intent Conflating the Attacks of September 11, 2001, With Misrepresentation of Iraq as a Security Threat as Part of Fraudulent Justification for a War of Aggression

#3 Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, to Manufacture a False Case for War

#4 Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Posed an Imminent Threat to the United States

#5 Illegally Misspending Funds to Secretly Begin a War of Aggression

#6 Invading Iraq in Violation of the Requirements of HJRes114

#7: Invading Iraq without a declaration of war.

#8: Invading Iraq in violation of the U.N. charter and international law.

#9: Failing to provide troops with body armor and vehicle armor.

#10: Falsifying accounts of US troops deaths and injuries for political purposes

#11: Establishment of permanent military bases in Iraq

#12: Initiating a war against Iraq for control of that nation's natural resources.

#13: Secret task force for directing national energy policy

#14: Misprision of a felony, misuse and exposure of classified information and cover up (Plame outing)

#15: Providing immunity from prosecution for criminal conduct for contractors in Iraq

#16: Reckless misspending and wasted US tax dollar with Iraq contractors

#17: Illegal detention - detaining indefinitely, and without charge, American citizens and foreign captives (suspension of habeus)

#18: Torture - secretly authorizing and encouraging use of torture, as matter of official policy

#19 Rendition

#20 Imprisoning Children Bush is guilty of impeachable offence arcticle 20, imprisoning children. Has personal and acting through agents has held at least 2,500 children in violation of Geneva convention and the rights of children in armed conflict signed by the US in 2002.

#21 Misleading Congress about threats from Iran

#22. HAS ESTABLISHED A BODY OF SECRET LAWS THROUGH THE OFFICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL. THE YOO MEMORANDUM WAS DECLASSIFIED YEARS AFTER IT SERVED AS LAW UNDER THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.

#23 Violated Posse Comitatus Act ESTABLISHED PROGRAMS FOR THE USE OF THE MILITARY IN LAW ENFORCEMENT. MUST BE AUTHORIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION OF THE CONGRESS SO THAT THE MILTARY CANNOT BECOME A NATIONAL POLICE FORCE.

#24 Spying on citizens violating 4th Amendment

#25 Directing telecoms to collect databases on US citizens.

#26 Announcing intent to violate laws w/signing statements, and then violating those laws.

#27 Failing to comply with congressional subpoenas, and instructing others to do so.

#28 tampering with free and fair election. Corruption with the administration of justice, False allegations of voter fraud in selected districts, immediately preceding elections. Undermining process.

#29: Conspiracy to violate voting rights act of 1965, Ohio Sec of State 2004-06

#30: Misleading congress and american people in an attemtp to destroy medicare.

#31 Katrina and the failures of gross negligence of the administration.

#32: Misleading congress and the American people. Systematically undermining global climate change. Article 2, Section 3: Personally and through subordinates including the VP, for not protecting property of people vis a vis global climate change thru deception.  Failure to ratify Kyoto. Editing reports - 294 edits by a lobbyist to add data which called into question the facts by muddying them. Or diminishing scientific findings.

#33: Repeatedly ignored and failed to respond to high level intelligence warnings of planned terrorist attacks in U.S. prior to 9/11.
Clark warned the president in daily briefings of the threat. Clark was unable to conviene a cabinet level position. Tenet met with the president 40 times to warn of threat. Still no meetings of top officials.

#34: Obstruction into the investigation of 9/11

#35: endangering the health of 9/11 first responders


by citizendave on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:33:28 PM EST

Massive amounts of MOJO for this! (2.00 / 3)

Dave, thanks for going to the trouble of tracking this down. I looked far and wide last night for this and couldn't find a damn thing, anywhere (apart from a one-paragraph article on AP with no list of Articles of Impeachment). It's a travesty that this is not considered important enough to be at the top of the news!

And, kudos to the diarist for posting this, too!


by bobswern on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:56:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Massive amounts of MOJO for this! (2.00 / 2)

i too am distressed at the lack of media attention given this most important issue....maybe if w would get a blowjob we could move forward with this.

btw i found the list at kos (whispers citizen dave)


by citizendave on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 01:05:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Massive amounts of MOJO for this! (none / 0)

The mere fact you found the list at Kos speaks volumes. These folks are widely considered by the minority that have ever heard of them to be a bunch of left wing loonies not dissimilar from the right wing loonies at Redstate. This is reality.


by ottovbvs on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:22:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Massive amounts of MOJO for this! (none / 0)

but how do you feel about kos?
i think they are providing a true service...but way too crowded.

middle of the road is just what america should strive for.......(not)


by citizendave on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:31:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Massive amounts of MOJO for this! (none / 0)

left wing loonies that have basically adopted and promoted the 50 state localized grassroots organization that is leading to the overthrow of republican controlled districts in blood red states?
Yeah, what a bunch of loonies, you can tell by how few people go to that site (Is this snark?  yes)

BTW I agree that Dkos has gotten hideous in the primary wars diaries, I don't read those, or if I do I can't last long, and I have supported Obama the whole primary.

Outside of the primary wars, the research and work of the diarists on many important substantive issues like FISA, immigration, and of course, the actual work of grassroots organizing, donations,  is tremendous and is also well known in the progressive blogoshpere.  The mere fact you dismiss them as left wing loonies calls into either your ignorance of the progressive blogoshpere or your distaste for such things. Just saying


Democrat for the democratic nominee
by KLRinLA on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:56:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 35 articles (none / 0)

Virtually none of these are crimes.  Maybe warrantless eavesdropping.  Maybe not responding to congressional subpoenas (but the Court would have to decide that).  The rest is bad policy.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 01:54:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 35 articles (none / 0)

each article was supported by much evidence....over 4 hours worth. above is just a list.


by citizendave on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:32:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 35 articles (none / 0)

Do you have a list for the full text of the articles? I could only find the text of the articles against Cheney, most of which were riddled with judgment calls (ie, what is "legitimate" evidence of WMD in Iraq).

I have a very hard time believing that, on any one of those articles, President Bush could be proved to have committed a "high crime or misdemeanor."  Invading Iraq was not illegal, it was stupid and arguably immoral.  Failing to prepare for Katrina was bad governance.  Selling the American people on the war is called politics.


What is The October Protocol?
by Koan on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:58:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 35 articles (none / 0)

Background: The 35 articles of impeachment proposed by Kucinich, are at:
<http://www.afterdowningstreet.org>, PDF at:
<http://chun.afterdowningstreet.org/amomentoftruth.pdf>. Video of
Kucinich on the House floor Monday evening is at:
<http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Kucinich_presents_Bush_impeachment_articles_0609.html>.

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167


by citizendave on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 04:23:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 35 articles (none / 0)

Impeachment does not carry the same standard as a criminal court.  'Dereliction of Duty' qualifies as a misdomeaner under the old English Law from which this charge derives.  


by orionwest on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 07:48:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (2.00 / 1)

another reason can be found..Senate hearings on torture..
being covered at Firedoglake...
second post right beneath Liebabyman post..

http://firedoglake.com/


"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:44:57 PM EST

Kucinich is a patriot. (2.00 / 3)

Last night, kevin22262 posted a couple of links where we can go to help. Go support Kucinich's Articles of Impeachment. Also, go to his site and call or write him to thank him and let him know he has your support. Then go call or write your members of Congress and strongly request that they support him, too. Let's do our part, people.

(And many thanks to Kevin who posted all those links.)


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 12:53:26 PM EST

Re: Bush Must (none / 0)

Unfortunately, Pelosi is part of the problem.

I thought she would be a good Speaker.  Now I think she sucks. Her career obviously outweighs everything else.


by WolfmanJack on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 01:25:44 PM EST

Re: Bush Must (none / 0)

Ummmh no. It's just that unlike you she isn't harboring a death wish for the democratic party.


by ottovbvs on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:24:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must (none / 0)

it is not clear if Democrats in Congress having an actual  backbone would help or hurt Democrats politically.

I sort of think it would help, if the charges are provable and the public can easily understand them.  It might hurt if it is viewed as "trumped up" charges.

Americans don't like weaklings, they actually seem to prefer crooks and tyrants over weaklings.

So maybe the list is too long.  Kucinich should stick to 2-3 strongest, provable charges.


by WolfmanJack on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:16:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must (none / 0)

Why don't we get beyond what you or I think and recognize that every poll I've seen says by a massive majority Americans don't want this. And do we really want to take all the attention off the Obama/McCain campaign and all those embarrasing votes the Dems are going to force so that we can indulge ourselves. Maturity please.


by ottovbvs on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:32:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must (2.00 / 1)

LMAO what embarrasing votes?  

So sorry, but if you are putting all of your faith in the Democratic party to fix our ills I think you are going to be sorely disappointed.


by JustJennifer on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:36:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must (none / 0)

Like todays over Oil company profits! Or how about Schip. I'm not putting all my faith in Democrats but I'm a democrat basically what are you.  


by ottovbvs on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 04:15:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must (none / 0)

I am a Democrat.  But I am an American first.  To allow Bush et al to get away with what they have done goes against all that is ethical and moral.  If we let them get away then we have lost already, and much more than an election or a Congressional seat or two.


by JustJennifer on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 04:27:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must (none / 0)

I won't comment on what you sound like.


by ottovbvs on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 08:43:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: kucinich video link (none / 0)

tp://rawstory.com/news/2008/Kucinich_pre sents_Bush_impeachment_articles_0609.htm l


by citizendave on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 01:47:07 PM EST

He'll be impeached in November (2.00 / 1)

and removed from office in january 2009.

time to move on.


by dcrolg on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 01:51:55 PM EST

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (none / 0)

A little late now don't you think??!!


by jrsygrl on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 02:40:04 PM EST

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (2.00 / 1)

Wasn't there a congressional report that just came out that stated Bush et al manufactured and stretched evidence to go to war with Iraq?  Anyone?

Out of the 35 articles I know there is enough to back up one if not more of the charges.  

I can't believe everyone is so much in love with the idea of an Obama presidency that they think it's an either or situation.  If all you care about is electing Obama and nothing else, then you are definitely letting yourself be played by both the Republicans and the Democrats.


by JustJennifer on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:17:33 PM EST

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (none / 0)

Go to Opednews.com for the full transcript posted by David Swanson. Folks, these are all crimes. Some of you are guilty of complicity by not demanding the Chief Executive obey the law. Google "American Complicity".


by Timothy Gatto on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:34:30 PM EST

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (none / 0)

As an interesting side note, it has been reported that the Bush family has purchased land in Paraguay.  

http://fromtheleft.wordpress.com/2006/11 29/bush-family-purchases-100000-acres-i n-paraguay

I tried to read more but all I found was essentially this same story posted several places.  Anyone know if it is true?


by JustJennifer on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 03:38:48 PM EST

That would be hilarious. (none / 0)

They might expect to be sued after he leaves office;  hard to get someone in court if they're in Paraguay.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 04:10:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bush Must Be Impeached Now! (2.00 / 1)

Robert Wexler is going to co-sponsor.


by JustJennifer on Tue Jun 10, 2008 at 07:11:22 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.