Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes: IMPEACHMENT: An American Wake Up Call Is In Progress!

Click for a full report.

Imbush Peach

An interview with Naomi Wolf about the 10 steps from democracy to dictatorship!

Stop The Spying Now

Stop the Spying!

Tuesday, February 20, 2007

IMPEACHMENT: An American Wake Up Call Is In Progress!




"The President should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole.

Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile.

To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."




In a representative democracy, the rule of law establishes the necessary premise that no one is above the law, the land, and the people. However, today we suffer under an administration which sees itself above the rule of law. The Bush administration has continuously lied to and manipulated the American people with illegal surveillance, mass detentions without judicial review, torture and signing statements that carve out exceptions to legislation. Today it is time for you to take action and tell the Bush administration we will no longer allow their abuse of power to go unnoticed.

Congress through various committees is in the process of conducting oversight investigations. Such oversight investigations have subpoena power and so this is the first step for Congress to move to a full blown impeachment. Your Congressperson needs to hear from you on this issue. Please send the sample letter or you can modify it in your own words.

We need your help in telling the Bush Administration that no one is above the rule of law. Help protect the rule of law in our country!

Send a Letter to Your Member of Congress

Sign the GP impeachment petition


Send a letter to the editor to your local paper and add your voice to the growing number of people defending the U.S. Constitution by supporting impeachment

Send Letter to the Editor



Submitted by Bob Fertik on February 17, 2007 - 10:16pm.ImpeachForChange

I'd like to give you a report from the front lines of History.

Today I had the remarkable honor of co-chairing a summit meeting of the largest groups fighting for the impeachment of George Bush and Dick Cheney:

Progressive Democrats of America

Green Party of the US

Gold Star Families for Peace


Traprock Peace Center

Constitution Summer

Independent Progressive Political Network

Climate Crisis Coalition

Just Foreign Policy

This meeting took place in New York City as part of this weekend's Emergency Summit to Impeach Bush for War Crimes organized by Many other impeachment groups were invited but couldn't make it. Naturally we will continue to reach out to every group that wants to impeach Bush and Cheney because it will take the largest possible grassroots movement to force the Democrats in Congress to put impeachment back on the table.

There were many forces that brought us together for this historic summit. Of course the illegal and disastrous War in Iraq has been the primary reason for impeachment since Bush launched it on the basis of lies; but any hope that the forces of "reason" would persuade Bush to end his war was buried with the corpse of the Baker-Hamilton Commission.

In fact, Bush showed his contempt for that bipartisan commission by doing the opposite of what they recommended: sending 48,000 more troops rather than bring troops home, and starting a war of words (and possibly terror) against Iran rather than negotiate.

Finally, we were brought together by the adamant refusal of Congressional Democrats to even begin serious investigations of Bush's pre-war lies and ongoing war crimes.

We spent very little time discussing the reasons why Congressional Democrats refuse to begin the impeachment process. Of course there are a handful of committed progressives in Congress who would have impeached Bush and Cheney the day Democrats took over Congress on January 4, and we speak to them as often as we can.

And there are dozens more Democrats who would support impeachment after a thorough investigation of Bush's crimes by a House committee. But they are blocked by a majority of Democrats in the House - led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi - who believe impeachment would (a) interfere with their legislative agenda and (b) harm Democrats' chances of taking back the White House in 2008.

So rather than waste our time on Congress, we came together to mobilize the overwhelming 58% majority of Americans who simply wish the Bush regime was over.

It was a similar mobilization that swept Democrats into power in 2006, but those Democrats have already forgotten who sent them. So our goal is simple: to mobilize an even larger majority and thereby create overwhelming pressure on Congress to impeach Bush and Cheney.

Specifically we have a 6-point plan:

1. On March 17, March on the Pentagon to end the Iraq War and Impeach Bush and Cheney

2. Gather 50 prominent Americans for a press conference on the Capitol Steps to demand impeachment

3. Hold Town Hall Meetings across the country on impeachment, modeled after the Vermont Town Meetings that have endorsed impeachment resolutions

4. Organize a bus tour from Washington DC to college campuses across the country with the message "IMPEACH OR DIE"

5. Launch a grassroots advertising campaign called "Bush is Over" modeled after the "War is Over" ad campaign created by John Lennon during the Vietnam War

6. On April 28, hold creative local impeachment events across the country, including assembling crowds to spell "IMPEACH!" in large outdoor spaces like beaches, monuments, and parks.

We will announce this plan to the full audience at the summit on Sunday morning at 10 a.m. so if you're in New York City please come!!!

Emergency Summit to Impeach Bush for War Crimes

17 Feb 2007 by Ticia
A wide range of national political organizations, academics, activists and
writers will gather this weekend in New York City for an Emergency Summit to develop national strategy for impeaching George W. Bush for war crimes and crimes ...
tpmcafe blogs -

Emergency Summit to Impeach Bush for War Crimes!

15 Feb 2007
Become an Expert in the Bush Regime’s Crimes • Strategies & Grounds for Impeachment • Legal Action Against Bush and Cheney • Make Hip-Hop, Not War • Why the US has
Iran in its sights: How do we Stop an Attack on Iran? ...
Knowledge is Power -

Today - NYC: Emergency Summit to Impeach Bush for War Crimes ...

17 Feb 2007
Join activists, leaders, academics, and writers in a two day event, Saturday
9:00am to Sunday 10:00pm, and Sunday 10:00am to 6:00pm. Among the many speakers will be former Attorney General Ramsey Clark. Cost: Suggested registration is ... Calendar -

[ More results from Calendar ]

Emergency Summit to Impeach Bush for War Crimes

16 Feb 2007 by rudkla

Informant: Mitchel Cohen From ufpj-news
World-News (Independent Media Source) -

Impeachment Day 45: The Impeachment Movement Unites

17 Feb 2007 by Bob Fertik
This meeting took place in
New York City as part of this weekend's Emergency Summit to Impeach Bush for War Crimes organized by Many other impeachment groups were invited but couldn't make it. ... - The Aggressive Progressives! -


[ More results from - The Aggressive Progressives! ]

Tour D’ Farce:Emergency Summit to Impeach Bush, Cheney, US ...

13 Feb 2007 by Malcontent
... unfortunately returned from her “Peace Mom” book launch in
France and has decided to hold yet another emergency summit to impeach the Great Satan and Satan’s whores (Bush, Cheney, US Military, and America as a whole) for war crimes. ...
The Two Malcontents -

Observation Post 021708

17 Feb 2007 by ddjango
Cohen (NY Greens/Green Party) 718-449-0037 email:


Saturday, Feb. 17 and Sunday Feb. 18, in New York City
P! - Organizes for March 17 Washington DC Protest ~

EMERGENCY Conference: Impeach Bush for War Crimes!

6 Feb 2007 by Marc
Bush escalates and threatens still wider war with
Iran. ... A movement to Impeach Bush for War Crimes can quickly advance the whole ... If you want to suggest or plan a workshop, contact: or 866 973 4463 !NO GW BUSH - Action Group -

Antiwar and looking ahead: What's it going to take?

27 Jan 2007 by the Burningman
Will we make it our mission to bring the crimes of the Bush regime to a halt! Emergency Impeachment Summit, NYC: February 17 & 18 ... A movement to Impeach Bush for War Crimes can quickly advance the whole struggle; making ending possible.
redflags - -



13 Feb 2007 by Buddhagem
This weekend there will be an emergency summit in New York City held by World Can't Wait ... A movement to Impeach Bush for War Crimes can quickly advance the whole ... As impeachment becomes imminent and his war options grow more limited; ...
The Blue Voice -

World Can't Wait: Emergency Summit to Impeach Bush for War Crimes

15 Feb 2007
WASHINGTON - February 15 - "IMPEACH BUSH FOR WAR CRIMES" evening program featuring Cindy Sheehan, Ramsey Clark, Rev. Lennox Yearwood, Debra Sweet, David Swanson
7:30pm Saturday, Feb 17 West Park Pr...
Breaking International News latest RSS... -

This weekend - Emergency Summit to Impeach Bush for War Crimes

15 Feb 2007 by facethe NYC crowd
Emergency Summit:. Impeach Bush for War Crimes! Saturday & Sunday, February 17 & 18
New York City Saturday 9am-10pm; Sunday 10-6. Saturday location (9am - 10pm): West Park Presbyterian Church 165 West 86th at Amsterdam, on Manhattan's ...
let it blurt -

[ More results from let it blurt ]

From DC: Antiwar and looking ahead, What's it going to take?

29 Jan 2007 by Jed Brandt
"We don't have the power to impeach our Prime Minister, but you have the ability to impeach ... Emergency Impeachment Summit, NYC: February 17 & 18 ... A movement to Impeach Bush for War Crimes can quickly advance the whole struggle...
portland indymedia - newswire -

2/17-18 (SAT-SUN) Impeachment Summit

14 Feb 2007 by Administrator
Summit to Impeach Bush for War Crimes. Saturday & Sunday, February 17 & 18 New York City Saturday 9am-10pm; Sunday 10-6. Join activists, leaders, academics, and writers including David Swanson, Bob Fertik, Steve Cobble, ...
NY Protest Calendar (Beta) -

[ More results from NY Protest Calendar (Beta) ]

OpEdNews: Tell Our Congress To Rescind Bush's War ...

28 Nov 2006 by BG1
Impeachment Hearings For Bush & Co.? How About War Crimes Tribunals ... IF Bush Is Smart (an Oxymoron), He'll Get Out Of
Iraq; If WE'RE Smart, We'll Impeach Him! ... US Senators Pledge To End Bush's Emergency War Supplements Responsible ...
Bill Giltner's News Review - -



10 Nov 2006 by Notes on Virginia
Analysis: The Riga summit was meant to turn around an
Alliance mission in trouble. ... to deploy troops to trouble spots in the event of "an emergency. ... Pelosi doesn't want to impeach Bush, and she's trying to take it "off the table.

American Blood Feud.

27 Jan 2007 by chrisbradley
The “EAS” has replaced the Emergency Broadcast System most of us have known for decades. ... Jan 27
04:01:33 impeach bush Jan 27 04:01:33 please it was only a joke ... Jan 27 04:15:40 that is … this American war against the ghost called ... - -


Big News Day - February 16, 2007

16 Feb 2007
She is actively working to impeach Bush and Cheney, and suggests you join or ... 6) Tune in to the summit on impeachment taking place in NYC this weekend- into Bush's other crimes and misadventures- the lying about the Iraq War,
Chris's Political Matters & Other... -


17 Feb 2007 by Ed, Dickau
EMERGENCY Conference: Impeach Bush for War Crimes! ... Impeachment Emergency SummitBy ddjango(ddjango) I encourage you to swamp Nancy Pelosi and Harry

Precinct Master: BUSH WAR CRIMES: CLOSING IN!Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes. ...
Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes -

[ More results from Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes ]

The Case for Impeachment:'s time

Submitted by mole333 on Mon, 2007-02-19 17:06.
Accountability Crime Government Impeachment Surveillance

I have been for impeachment ever since it became clear to me that we were being "led" by a "president" who was corrupt, a criminal, lying to get us into wars, violating the Constitution, etc. But for various reasons I wasn't relly anxious to see impeachment attempted.

It seemed too hard to make the case, too divisive when I wanted to see Democrats seen as the reasonable, uniting force in America, and I wanted to see Democrats get some things accomplished rather than be seen as obstructionist.

Several things have largely changed my mind. What crystalized it was meeting former Congresswoman from Brooklyn, Liz Holtzman, at the Independent Neighborhood Democrats meeting this last week in Brooklyn. You see, Liz Holtzman was a member of the House of Representatives in the early '70's and was one of the people who constructed the Articles of Impeachment against Richard Nixon.

She has written a book on the topic called "The Impeachment of George W. Bush" and her top argument for impeachment is based on an exact precedent from 1974. In other words, Bush has committed one act for which there already is an article of impeachment constructed, written and voted on in Congress. All that needs to be done is for the current Congress to apply the 1974 precedent to our current President.

I am a pragmatist. I believe in getting things done and if something isn't going to work you don't put a lot of time into it. So, I have been reluctant to support impeachment even though I feel the grounds are certainly there.

When people talk impeachment I am tentatively interested, but I have tended to want to focus more on exposing Republican corruption to dispel the myth of the "moral" party, build the Democrats as the reasonable, effective, and fiscally responsible and reformist party, and win some seats in Congress. Impeachment seemed like an impossible dream that could become a very damaging nightmare.

Well, we won some seats in Congress. And that changed one major thing: Impeachment could now be debated by Congress if they wanted to. BUT...I still wasn't ready. I felt it was more important to show America that we could get something done.

Let's be the economic Populist Party, the progressive party, and work on things like the minimum wage, election reform, health care, stem cell research, education, etc. Only after we get some real concrete things done can we start battling over Iraq and impeachment, or so I thought.

Well, we have already been getting things done. The Democrats are leading the most productive Congress I can imagine. We need to keep it up for a bit, but I think we already are proving our worth to America. I hope the momentum keeps up for awhile, but clearly Iraq should be on the table and we have accomplished a great deal just by forcing debate on it. America likes what the Democrats are doing so far.


We have the House majority, and we have started to show we are an effective party that keeps its campaign promises and can get things done. The Republicans are coming off as obstructionist and petty. Do we have the credibility to raise the issue of impeachment?

Yes...and no. I want to explain why I now say yes, and ask your help to turn the little bit of "no" into a yes.

During the NY-11 Democratic Primary we all loved so much, I backed Chris Owens, as everyone knows. He is an articulate voice for progressive Democrats and I felt we desperately needed that. Well, as we all know Chris lost.

One of the things Chris was a strong progressive preacher for was impeachment. He said clearly and publicly that although there are many possible grounds for impeachment, we have one absolutely solid one: illegal wiretapping. I really wanted someone who could articulately voice that belief to go to Congress.

But I found that this message didn't attract local "progressives" in Park Slope. They didn't want to hear "impeachment." And David Yassky openly denigrated the idea of impeachment as preventing actually getting anything done. In some ways this was nothing more than a more extreme version of my own view: I didn't denigrate the idea, but I did think it might get in the way of getting things done.

Yassky supporters told me to my face we didn't want another impeachment circus like the impeachment of Clinton. This further convinced me that we weren't ready to talk impeachment. Though I still wanted someone who could deliver that message! You gotta have some good preachers before you get converts.

Then I heard Liz Holtzman, who has been through it before.

If ANYONE can be called an expert on impeaching a President, it's Congresswoman Holtzman. With my mind already sympathetic to impeachment, and already feeling like Democrats are finally in charge and showing they are the party responsive to the people, hearing Congresswoman Holtzman finally convinced me that now is indeed the time to be working towards impeachment. And I am convinced that David Yassky was wrong to denigrate the idea and his followers were completely misinterpreting the situation.


Are we just sinking to their level of partisan politics? The aswer is clearly "no." The people who look to the Clinton impeachment and reject the whole idea of impeachment are looking to the wrong precedent.

The basis of impeachment of George Bush would be based on the Nixon impeachment, as I will outline below.

The impeachment of Nixon was based on a bipartisan investigation by Congress uncovering clear Constitutional violations. The ultimate articles of impeachment were passed with BIPARTISAN support and widespread popular support among voters. By contrast, the impeachment of Clinton was based on his lying about a blow job and was a partisan witch hunt by right wing extremists. The final vote was along partisan lines and had little popular support.

Our model will be the Nixon impeachment. As such, the fundamental issues will be at the foundation of our democracy. Nixon's crimes were direct violations of the Constitution. As such, it is critical to impeach because otherwise the precedent is set for presidents to break the law. So, if the basis of impeachment for Bush is similar to that of Nixon, it is imperative we impeach.

So, what is the basis for impeachment of Bush according to one of the only people in the world today to work on Articles of impeachment of a president? Just like Chris Owens advocated, illegal wiretapping.

There are other bases for impeachment: lying about Iraq to get us into a war, failures surrounding Katrina, etc.

They are outlined in Holtzman's book, The Impeachment of George W. Bush. All of those reasons are important and SHOULD be investigated. But, illegal wire tapping should be the starting point and is the basis for impeachment with the strongest precedent. Why? Because we already have the article of impeachment written up and have proven that it can get bipartisan support.

George W. Bush pesonally authorized about 45 wiretaps without court approval. He has also publically admitted that he has done this.

This is precisely what is covered in Article 2 of the articles of impeachment of Richard Nixon adopted by a bipartisan vote in Congress. Bush is guilty of a crime that was part of the Nixon impeachment. No new case has to be built from scratch. The framework for impeachment based on illegal wiretapping already exists from 1974.


Article 2

Using the powers of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in disregard of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has repeatedly engaged in conduct violating the constitutional rights of citizens, impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries, or contravening the laws governing agencies of the executive branch and the purposed of these agencies.

This conduct has included one or more of the following:

1. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, endeavored to obtain from the Internal Revenue Service, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in income tax returns for purposed not authorized by law, and to cause, in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income tax audits or other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a discriminatory manner.

2. He misused the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secret Service, and other executive personnel, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, by directing or authorizing such agencies or personnel to conduct or continue electronic surveillance or other investigations for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; he did direct, authorize, or permit the use of information obtained thereby for purposes unrelated to national security, the enforcement of laws, or any other lawful function of his office; and he did direct the concealment of certain records made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of electronic surveillance.

3. He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents, in violation or disregard of the constitutional rights of citizens, authorized and permitted to be maintained a secret investigative unit within the office of the President, financed in part with money derived from campaign contributions, which unlawfully utilized the resources of the Central Intelligence Agency, engaged in covert and unlawful activities, and attempted to prejudice the constitutional right of an accused to a fair trial.

4. He has failed to take care that the laws were faithfully executed by failing to act when he knew or had reason to know that his close subordinates endeavored to impede and frustrate lawful inquiries by duly constituted executive, judicial and legislative entities concerning the unlawful entry into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee, and the cover-up thereof, and concerning other unlawful activities including those relating to the confirmation of Richard Kleindienst as Attorney General of the United States, the electronic surveillance of private citizens, the break-in into the offices of Dr. Lewis Fielding, and the campaign financing practices of the Committee to Re-elect the President.

5. In disregard of the rule of law, he knowingly misused the executive power by interfering with agencies of the executive branch, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Criminal Division, and the Office of Watergate Special Prosecution Force, of the Department of Justice, and the Central Intelligence Agency, in violation of his duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.


The 28 who voted for Article 2 included 6 Republicans. It's all there ready for us to use. Bush signed his name to the illegal wiretaps and has publically admitted it. Chris Owens had it right, of course.

Liz Holtzman also noted that Bush really didn't need to resort to illegal means if he really needed to wiretap. In response to Watergate, Congress in 1978 set up a judicial mechanism by which the President can more easily get permission to wiretap through a court. That court has, since 1978, received some 19,000 requests from Presidents to wiretap. Out of those 19,000 requests only 5 have been denied. Why couldn't Bush go through this existing, Constitutionally approved method of wiretapping? He chose to break the law instead. Why? What was he doing that he felt he had less than a 5/19,000 chance of the court approving?

So there it is. The way I am thinking of it, there is clear probable cause to initiate impeachment based on Article 2 of Nixon's impeachment. There is possible cause for other articles of impeachment, but they can be added later once an investigation uncovers more facts. But an investigation must be initiated.

Now, here's where I need your help. I love our Democratic majority Congress. They are kicking ass, in my opinion. But, as in the impeachment of Nixon, widespread public support (or at least interest) must be demonstrated. It also would be very helpful if at least one Republican showed an interest. The pressure has to come from the public.

Write your Representative and write the media urging impeachment of George W. Bush based on Article 2 of the impeachment of Richard Nixon. If they don't hear it from you they may not hear it from anyone and the meme may remain in the background. I don't expect action to be taken right away. After all, Congress really is getting things done. But a build up of support starting now will make it happen.


Washington Peace Center Hosts a Discussion on Investigations of Bush-Cheney and the Process of Impeachment. Friday, March 9th, 6:30 PM, St. Stephen Episcopal Church, 16th and Newton Streets, NW (Nearest Metro is Columbia Heights) ... - Impeach... -

March 9th in Washington, D.C., Impeachment Goes on the Table

Activism Impeachment

The Washington Peace Center Hosts a Discussion on Investigations of Bush-Cheney and the Process of Impeachment

Friday, March 9th, 6:30 PM, St. Stephen Episcopal Church, 16th and Newton Streets, NW (Nearest Metro is Columbia Heights)

Featured Panel will Include:

* Congresswoman Liz Holtzman (NY) who served on the Impeachment Panel during Nixon and author of the book "The Impeachment of George W. Bush"

* David Swanson: Former Kucinich campaign staffer, national board member of Progressive Democrats of America and co-founder of

* John Judge: Director of CHOICES fomer staffer of Rep. Cynthia McKinney and co-author of legislation to pursue articles of impeachment against President Bush.

* And moderated by Pete Perry: Coordinator of the Washington Peace Center, a former reporter and staff assistant to the late Sen. Paul Wellstone.


I ask Congress to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney for the following reasons:

1. Violating the United Nations Charter by launching an illegal "War of Aggression" against Iraq without cause, using fraud to sell the war to Congress and the public, misusing government funds to begin bombing without Congressional authorization, and subjecting our military personnel to unnecessary harm, debilitating injuries, and deaths.

2. Violating U.S. and international law by authorizing the torture of thousands of captives, resulting in dozens of deaths, and keeping prisoners hidden from the International Committee of the Red Cross.

3. Violating the Constitution by arbitrarily detaining Americans, legal residents, and non-Americans, without due process, without charge, and without access to counsel.

4. Violating the Geneva Conventions by targeting civilians, journalists, hospitals, and ambulances, and using illegal weapons, including white phosphorous, depleted uranium, and a new type of napalm.

5. Violating U.S. law and the Constitution through widespread wiretapping of the phone calls and emails of Americans without a warrant.

6. Violating the Constitution by using "signing statements" to defy hundreds of laws passed by Congress.

7. Violating U.S. and state law by obstructing honest elections in 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006.

8. Violating U.S. law by using paid propaganda and disinformation, selectively and misleadingly leaking classified information, and exposing the identity of a covert CIA operative working on sensitive WMD proliferation for political retribution.

9. Subverting the Constitution and abusing Presidential power by asserting a "Unitary Executive Theory" giving unlimited powers to the President, by obstructing efforts by Congress and the Courts to review and restrict Presidential actions, and by promoting and signing legislation negating the Bill of Rights and the Writ of Habeas Corpus.

10. Gross negligence in failing to assist New Orleans residents after Hurricane Katrina, in ignoring urgent warnings of an Al Qaeda attack prior to Sept. 11, 2001, and in increasing air pollution causing global warming.

The Libby trial makes impeachment easy, and obligatory
OpEdNews -
The severity of the crimes, however, once put into the context of formal impeachment, would carry such great weight that many Republicans would join to get ...

February 14, 2007 at 12:49:01

The Libby trial makes impeachment easy, and obligatory

by Carol Wolman

"Scooter" Libby, Cheney's chief of staff until he was forced to resign after being indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice, is now on trial. The trial transcript is shining a lurid light on the inner workings of the White House during a crucial period in 2003.

The testimony by multiple reporters over the past two weeks has made it clear that Cheney was the prime mover in the outing of Valerie Plame. Cheney was obsessed with discrediting Plame's husband Joe Wilson, who had dared to call Bush a liar, publicly, in a New York Times op-ed piece. Cheney orchestrated multiple leaks about Plame's identity as a CIA agent, from several White House personnel to various key reporters.

Bush must have been aware of it, since his press secretary Richard Armitage was one of the leakers. Libby's defense seems to be that Rove was the main leaker, and that, he, Libby, is being scapegoated to protect Rove and Bush, whose "brain" Rove is. Thus Bush is implicated as well as Cheney.

The prosecutor in the Libby trial, the intrepid Patrick Fitzgerald, has already done the time-consuming investigative work that the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by John Conyers, would otherwise have to undertake. All that remains for the House to do, is to decide whether the outing of an undercover agent for political purposes is an impeachable offense.

Although Bush and Cheney are not themselves on trial right now, and a sitting president cannot be prosecuted in a regular court of law, surely the published testimony in the Libby trial is compelling evidence that Cheney conspired to out a CIA agent, and Bush was complicit. This is a crime, and in context, a heinous crime. Here's the context:

Bush and Cheney had just used manufactured evidence to persuade the American public that there was reason to launch a pre-emptive war against Iraq. They were "fixing the facts around the policy" as the famous Downing Street memo put it. (A recent Pentagon study confirms this.)

Wilson called them on it, and to spite and discredit him, they claimed it was his CIA wife who sent him to Niger to check out a supposed purchase of uranium by Iraq, and that his findings, therefore, were suspect. The logic of this escapes me; it's much more likely that the motive for outing Plame was pure vengeance.

Plame ran a network of 70 or so operatives all around the world, who took great risks to track WMDs on the international black market, and to make sure that terrorists didn't get hold of them. How many of the agents were killed after Plame's identity was made public is classified information, but no doubt some were. The entire network was exposed and rendered ineffectual.

Dear reader, you may remember that Dubya's claim to fame is that he's fighting a war on terror. His excuse for invading Iraq was that Saddam had WMDs. Keeping WMDs from terrorists should have been his main objective. Instead, he allows his veep, his press secy, and various other key staff people to leak this top secret information to the press. Terrorists everywhere must have been overjoyed! Without the Plame network, obtaining WMDs got a lot easier!

If terrorists are the enemy, the outing of Plame gave them aid and comfort. This is the definition of treason.- giving aid and comfort to the enemy. The operatives who were killed as a result of publishing her identity were in fact murdered by the leakers and their masters. In other words, Bush and Cheney are probably guilty of treason and murder.

The outing of Plame makes Watergate look like a Sunday School picnic. The investigation has been done, the crime is obvious, the evidence is public. Hearings by the House Judiciary Committee shouldn't take more than a week. It only takes a simple majority to impeach. With a clear Democratic majority in the House, impeachment should be a foregone conclusion.

It's true that a 2/3 majority in the Senate is needed to convict Bush and Cheney and remove them from office, and the Democrats have only a one-vote margin. The severity of the crimes, however, once put into the context of formal impeachment, would carry such great weight that many Republicans would join to get rid of the malefactors.

All the excuses- that impeachment is too slow and takes too much energy from "more important" issues, fall by the wayside now. Fitzpatrick has done the work, the crimes are obvious.

What is Congress waiting for! If they fail to move now, no matter what sort of deal Pelosi made last year, aren't they complicit? Where is the bill of impeachment that will start the process?

In the name of the Prince of Peace, Carol Wolman


Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

Carol S. Wolman, MD is a psychiatrist in Northern California. A lifelong peace activist, she has written extensively on the psychology of our times. She is actively working to impeach Bush and Cheney, and suggests you join or form a local group at She ran for Congress as a nonpartisan write-in candidate in CA district 1, and is a coordinator of The Longhouse Coalition.

Contact Author

Contact Editor

View Other Articles by Author


Concord Monitor - Concord,NH,USA
Amplifying the debate on impeachment will bring the truth out of the shadows. The systematic conspiracy of deception, the subtle but alarmingly profound ...

Case for impeachment grows steadily stronger,

Robert S. Reno, Hopkinton

For the Monitor

February 14. 2007 8:00AM

The United States faces grave geopolitical challenges that require decisive response. American democracy is on the chopping block. To find our way as a nation and people, we need to be able to rely on authoritative sources of both information and guidance.

But national policymaking has been hijacked. Extremist ideology, erosion of democratic process and a pack of lies have been collapsed together by our leaders, leaving us vulnerable and rudderless.

And now the new secretary of defense is making poorly substantiated claims about Iran that echo eerily the claims about Iraq that brought us into this impasse. Faith has been broken. Credibility has been strained to the breaking point, and not one but several credible national leaders are warning that World War III either looms near or has begun already, which is chilling!

Instead of reason as the basis for national guidance we're held hostage by an ideological agenda dictating policy that is in turn manipulating intelligence, and the sum of this dynamic forewarns disaster.

To the extent that this endangers the national interest, and to the extent that ethical breaches, constitutional lapses or crimes are involved, both domestic and international, the scenario is treasonous.

Amplifying the debate on impeachment will bring the truth out of the shadows. The systematic conspiracy of deception, the subtle but alarmingly profound erosion of civil liberties and breaches against international law all add up to a shocking snapshot of democracy under siege from high places within.

And nothing is as shocking about it as our collective complacency.

An internet search in any major search engine under the word impeach is well worth the few minutes it takes. Try it. You may be amazed and alarmed!


Stoughton Residents To Vote On Troop Withdrawal, Impeachment ...
WISC - Madison,WI,USA
... from Iraq while the second asks whether the government should launch an impeachment investigation against President George W. Bush, WISC-TV reported. ...


Measures Will Be On April 3 Ballot

UPDATED: 12:37 pm CST February 14, 2007

STOUGHTON, Wis. -- Stoughton voters will be the first in Wisconsin to answer two referendum questions this spring.

The first will ask whether the United States should begin immediate withdrawal from Iraq while the second asks whether the government should launch an impeachment investigation against President George W. Bush, WISC-TV reported.

The Stoughton City Council decided to put both questions on the April 3 ballot on Tuesday night.

Stoughton to vote on troops, impeachment
The Capital Times -
The troop withdrawal petition had the signatures of 986
Stoughton citizens, and an impeachment petition had 855 signatures. The two issues will be listed on ...

Stoughton to vote on troops, impeachment

By Karyn Saemann

Correspondent for The Capital Times

STOUGHTON - Stoughton voters will be asked April 3 whether U.S. troops should be immediately withdrawn from Iraq and whether George Bush and Dick Cheney should be impeached.

The Stoughton City Council voted 7-2 Tuesday night, with three abstentions, to indefinitely table a request by citizens to put the two questions on the ballot.

Under the state's direction legislation law, if the council fails to vote up or down on the request by Feb. 20, it automatically goes on the April 3 ballot. The decision to table it Tuesday night, at the last regular council meeting before Feb. 20, amounted to putting the question on the ballot.

The troop withdrawal petition had the signatures of 986 Stoughton citizens, and an impeachment petition had 855 signatures. The two issues will be listed on the ballot as separate questions.

City Council President Ron Christianson said there was no discussion prior to the vote. Christianson said he didn't believe such a discussion was appropriate at the council level.

The end result, however, is that the right of petitioners has been recognized and "it allows voters their privacy. They can vote their opinion in the voting booth," Christianson said.

"And we can go on from here," Christianson said. "Hopefully, things like this won't come to us again in the future."

Speaking for the statewide Wisconsin Impeachment/Bring Our Troops Home Coalition, Stoughton resident Buzz Davis said that "we're real pleased" with the council's move. "The most important thing is that they are on the ballot."

Davis said a series of town hall-style meetings will be scheduled between now and April to give citizens a chance to learn about the questions. He said upfront that the meetings will be one-sided, with opponents not expected to be invited to participate in panel discussions and other activities.

"I will let them do their own meetings," Davis said.

Ald. Gary Locke, one of the two dissenters Tuesday night, said he would have preferred that the council directly adopt a troop withdrawal resolution that would have been passed on to the state's congressional delegation. That way, he said, there would have been an opportunity to include a cover letter expressing support for troops currently in Iraq, and a wish that they return safely.

"None of that is included, and I think that is a very important part of the process," Locke said.

The one line that will appear on the ballot, "The United States should begin an immediate withdrawal of all military personnel from Iraq," had to remain exactly the way it appeared on the petition, Locke said.

"I'm afraid the language isn't adequate enough for my taste," Locke said. "The one line doesn't really express the way I feel personally about how it should be handled."

Ald. Patrick Schneider also voted no to tabling the issue.

Davis said this is the first community in Wisconsin to put both questions together on a ballot. And, it is only the third Wisconsin community to ask voters about impeachment.

Wisconsin Rapids and Pittsville had impeachment questions on the November 2006 ballot. In both places the questions were defeated, with about one-third of voters supportive.

In November 2006, nine communities and Ozaukee County had troop withdrawal questions on the ballot. All of them passed.

In April 2006, 32 Wisconsin communities had troop withdrawal questions on the ballot; in 24 places, the referendum was successful.

February 14, 2007

Technical questions and suggestions may be directed to The Capital Times

Web editor. Please state your concern in the subject line.

Please use our letter to the editor form for all editorial comments and suggestions.

More on State Sen. Oemig's Impeachment Resolution

Adam Kline (D-37, South Seattle) have all shown an interest in getting the bill a hearing and out of committee to beat the approaching legislative deadlines, it's clear no one's ready to dismiss Oemig's resolution to move on impeachment ...
Slog -

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

More on State Sen. Oemig’s Impeachment Resolution

Posted by on February 14 at 10:57 AM

I’m surprised to find that Sen. Eric Oemig’s resolution has more traction than I thought. Indeed, I thought it was DOA. But after speaking to a few Senators yesterday and hearing that key party commitee chairs like Sen. Majority Leader Sen. Lisa Brown (D-3, Spokane), Govermnet Operations Chair Sen. Darlene Fairely (D-32, Forest Park), and Judiciary Chair Sen. Adam Kline (D-37, South Seattle) have all shown an interest in getting the bill a hearing and out of committee to beat the approaching legislative deadlines, it’s clear no one’s ready to dismiss Oemig’s resolution to move on impeachment.

Sen. Oemig actually didn’t have any official co-sponsors as of yesterday afternoon, but that’s because his colleagues were waiting for him to finalize the language (ie, tone it down a bit). He reports that he will shop for co-sponsors in caucus this morning and should have a number of co-sponsors when he officially unveils the resolution at a one o’clock press conference today in Olympia.

I got a sneak peek at Oemig’s resolution, and I have a column coming out today about it, but I didn’t have room to include the specifics from my lengthy interview with him. So here are some outtakes.

Sen. Oemig said that while there’s “a sense this is a federal issue… federal policies are really impacting policy at the state level. The $8 billion a month on the war is causing general cuts in funding for our state priorities like education and health care.”

He also said that when he was doorbelling last fall on the eastside, the anger at Bush and the war came up again and again. Specifically, one older man (with pro-military bumperstickers on his car) actually broke down crying when Oemig canvassed him, pleading with Oemig to do something about the war if elected. At the time, Oemig told the man it was a federal issue. But then other constituents started telling Oemig about a federal clause that allows state legislatures to push for impeachment. “They said, ‘If you’re elected would you vote Yes on that?’ I said absolutely I would. At the time, I had no idea I’d be the prime sponsor.”

Asked about the potential for the GOP to spoof the resolution as distracting from the business of the state, while at the same time stirring up a hotly partisan divide, Oemig said, “I believe the blue wave sent a very strong message that this President needs to be held accountable.”

Frustrated that Washington State’s lefties in Congress (Reps. McDermott and Inslee) don’t appear to be moving on an impeachment resolution—Oemig reports that he talked to staff from both offices and their response to doing something was “not satisfactory”— Oemig said: “This is too important to sweep it under the carpet. It would set a dangerous precedent [to let the President get away with things like illegal wiretapping and lying about war intel].”

Finally, Oemig said: “It’s not only the gentleman crying on his front porch that pushed me to do this, but I think about my son [a one-year-old] asking me in 10 years…What did you do?”

For some clarity on the legitimacy of Sen. Oemig’s resolution, I talked to UW prof Stewart Jay, a professor of Constitutional Law. He told me, absolutely, states have the standing to ask Congress to begin the process of impeachment. He also said that Congress can ignore the resolution. However, he added: “I can imagine that if a significant majority of states passed resolutions requesting the U.S. House to initiate impeachment [proceedings] it could have a political effect in Congress.”

Right now, California, New Jersey, and Vermont are all considering similar resolutions.

As I told Sen. Oemig last night, while I find the language and spirit of his resolution electrifying, I also think it’s politically goofy and quite frankly technically ill-conceived. For example, he says the war is robbing money from things like education and health care at the sate level. Okay. But putting Bush on trial over the next year has nothing to do with hastening an end to the war. If anything, impeachment hearings would divide Congress and sap the necessary bipartisan will that’s needed to end the war soon.

Sen. Oemig’s gesture makes me smile, but ultimately it’s just symbolic. In an era when political symbolism is a big deal, this may be more of a scarlet letter for local Democrats than a gold star. We’ll see how it goes in the next few weeks.


Pres. Bush has systematically abused his office and attacked the organs of government by cherry picking intelligence to go to war either with reckless disregard of facts or known indifference to facts; he has put the USA on record as favoring torture/unlawful rendition; he has supported warantless searches and seizures. All this has led to a nearly $1.5 trillion waste of funds and an Iraq that is more hospitable to terrorists today than it was previously.

We ALL should pursue investigation of impeachable offenses and in all likelihood impeachment because silence/inaction says to Bush, Cheney and anyone else who would try this in the future, "go ahead, screw us, we don't care, we will let you get away with it!"

Our State legislators have a role. Our congresspersons have a role.
Enough already. Stop tolerating high crimes and misdemeanors. It's not a game. It's our democratic government that is at stake.
Cleve Stockmeyer


A while back I started to agitate my state representatives via email and snail mail to begin the process of impeaching President Bush. You see, under what is known as Jefferson's Manual on Parliamentary Practice and Rules of the House of Representatives the process of impeaching a President of the United States can be started by an impeachment request referral from any one of the states legislatures. Several state legislatures are now in the process of debating proposals to refer impeachment requests to congress.

According to Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual, "there are various methods of setting an impeachment in motion":

1) By charges made on the floor by a member of the House;

2) By charges preferred by a memorial filed by a House member;

3) By charges contained in a Resolution introduced by a House member;

4) By a message from the President;

5) By charges transmitted by a State legislature, or a grand jury;

6) By facts developed and reported by an investigating committee of the House.

Most of the representatives and senators that I wrote to about this had no clue that this avenue for removing a federal official was open to them and one, Representative Larry Springer and who is my state rep, actually got into a heated email exchange with me where he argued that only members of the U.S. House of Representatives could begin the impeachment process.

Needless to say I will be weighing heavily whether to support Mr. Springer during the next election cycle given his lack of understanding of both the Constitution and his job description.

Anyway, it seems that one of our state reps finally had a come to Jesus moment about this for this morning it was announced that Senator Eric Oemig, who is also my senator, will be introducing today a resolution requesting that the Washington State Legislature refer a petition to the United States Congress requesting that they begin an impeachment investigation of both President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

Democracy in action.

Home » Organize » Impeach Bush Now!

Demand More Polls on Bush Impeachment

Submitted by Bob Fertik on August 24, 2005 - 1:09am.Impeachment Polls

Here at a glance are the polls on the impeachment of George Bush (question wordings, along with party breakdowns and related questions on trust and honesty are summarized here):











Wish Bush Presidency Was "Over"












Major investigations (by Democrats)






Impeach (by Democrats)






Iraq WMD

Impeach (by Democrats)












LA Times


Impeachable offense





LA Times








Impeach and remove



























Impeach and remove
























Hold accountable through impeachment and removal






Hold accountable through impeachment






Impeach and remove






Consider impeaching






Consider impeaching





Zogby (LV)

Hold accountable through impeachment




On 6/30/05, a Zogby poll found 42% of Americans said "if it is found that President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should hold him accountable through impeachment."

After that poll, began a campaign to urge other pollsters to ask Americans about impeachment (see below). But the pollsters refused, because they were terrified they would anger Karl Rove. So asked its supporters to contribute funds so we could commission impeachment polls from the same pollsters that provide periodic results to the media. raised over $10,000 and made history by commissioning the first polls ever funded by the netroots.

On 10/11/05, the members of paid for a poll by Ipsos Public Affairs that found Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he lied about the war in Iraq by a margin of 50%-44% - virtually a majority!

On 11/4/05, the members of paid for a second poll by Zogby that found Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he lied about the war in Iraq by a margin of 53%-42% - now a solid majority!

(Note: some observers have been confused by the "if he lied" part of the question. These polls show a solid majority of Americans believe Bush lied.)

On 12/14/05, members of hired Rasmussen Reports to ask a harder-edged question: "Should President Bush be impeached and removed from Office?" 32% said yes, 58% said no. Rasmussen also asked: "Should Vice President Cheney be Impeached and Removed from Office?" 35% said yes, 55% said no. A gap between support for impeachment hearings and removal is understandable - there was a 10% gap in similar polls for President Clinton in 1998. Rasmussen's results probably understate support for impeachment and removal, because Rasmussen's polls consistently show Bush's approval ratings 5-10% higher than all other polls.

On 1/16/06, members of hired Zogby International to ask the first poll question relating the NSA wiretapping scandal to impeachment: "If President Bush wiretapped American citizens without the approval of a judge, do you agree or disagree that Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment." 52% said yes, 43% said no.

This poll sends a stunning rebuke to pollsters (and pundits) who claim Americans support illegal wiretapping. "The American people are not buying Bush's outrageous claim that he has the power to wiretap American citizens without a warrant. Americans believe terrorism can be fought without turning our own government into Big Brother," said co-founder Bob Fertik.

It's time for other pollsters to ask about impeaching George Bush. When the Lewinsky scandal broke in 1998, just about every pollster in the business started polling on impeachment:

On 5/1/05, the Downing Street Memos proved Bush lied about war, which is infinitely worse than lying about sex. So why is Bush being treated differently by the pollsters?

I'm keeping track of the major media polls since July here. Polls that include impeachment are underlined. If we paid for the poll, you'll see ($).


Gary Langer
Dan Merkle

10/11/05 $

Trevor Tompson
Will Lester



Kathy Frankovic
Murray Edelman





Dana Blanton
John Gorman


Frank Newport
(see Newport's excuses on 8/30/05, revised on 12/21/05)


Randall Thomas

LA Times



Mark Murray
Sheldon Gawiser

NY Times

Rich Meislin
Todd Purdum
Adam Nagourney
News Desk

Howard Fineman


Peyton Craighill
Scott Keeter


12/14/05 $


USA Today

Susan Page
Richard Benedetto

Wall St Journal

Washington Post

Richard Morin
Dan Balz
Michael Getler
Michael Abramowitz
(see Morin's excuses on 12/20/05)

11/4/05 ($)

Here's what you can do:

1) Write Zogby ( to thank them for asking about impeachment in June, and encourage them to keep asking the question.

2) Write all the other major pollsters and ask them why they haven't asked voters about impeaching Bush. (If your browser won't let you highlight these addresses, use the printer-friendly version.),,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

You can also use these forms:



Here is a form letter you can personalize:

On November 4, a Zogby poll found 53% of Americans said "if it is found that President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should hold him accountable through impeachment."

Why haven't you asked Americans whether they believe Bush should be impeached for lying about Iraq?

Even on the narrow question of the CIA leak scandal, 86% of Americans say it has great or some importance - compared to only 62% who felt that way about Monica Lewinsky.

Yet when the Lewinsky scandal broke in 1998, nearly every pollster asked about impeachment - even though only 26% of Americans supported it!

Why are you going easy on George Bush for lying about war, when you raked Bill Clinton over the coals for lying about sex?

3. These MSM reporters cover political polls. Ask them why they have not covered the AfterDowningStreet impeachment polls.,,,

4. These MSM reporters have covered the AfterDowningStreet impeachment polls and deserve a thank-you note.

Please post any non-automated responses you get below!

Update: On 12/20/05, Chris Bowers of MyDD encouraged his readers to join an online chat with Washington Post polling editor Richard Morin to ask him about the Post's refusal to ask about impeachment. MediaMatters blogged Morin's response, which was a combination of whining and lying. Great work, everyone!

‹ Clinton Impeachment PollsupAmericans Believe Bush Lied about Iraq ›

Bob Fertik's blog printer-friendly version login or register to post comments send to friend

Impeachment Question based on lies

Submitted by lockerh on August 24, 2005 - 8:13pm.


Zogby Poll is to be congratulated for being so forward-thinking that they asked about impeachment in their June survey. It's hard for me to believe that only 42% responded affirmatively as to whether this president should be impeached if it is discovered that he lied to the country to get us to go to war. After all, what more horrible act could a trusted leader do to his people to betray them? I'm appalled that nearly 60% of the people would NOT think this an impeachable offense.

However, I also remember that at the time the Congress was intent upon impeaching President Clinton for possibly lying about a sexual peccadillo, the populace was 70% AGAINST that Congressional effort. As I remember, the populace continued to be 70% against that impeachment effort throughout its duration. (Personally I can't understand why that was not 99.9%; nevertheless, that is my memory.)

And so I ask you to make and publish a comparison of the impeachment polls for Clinton during the months running up to and through his impeachment proceedings.

I also ask you to continue to monitor today's opinions about impeachment as we move forward and as more and more solid and documentary evidence about Bush's lies, cover-ups, and manipulation of intelligence (such as exposed in the Downing Street Minutes) are made public.

Thanks very much for your good efforts at the truth.

Impeach, Impeach, Impeach

by Cenk Uygur

Fri Feb 02, 2007 at 06:27:19 AM PST

Every single day the US puts out another statement about how Iran is helping in attacks against US troops in Iraq. This is nothing but complete lies. The same type of lies we heard before the Iraq War. The Iranians support the Shiites in Iraq. The insurgents laying down the IEDs against our troops and that are doing a great majority of the attacks against us are - Sunnis!

The Iranians would never support the Sunnis. The Shiite militias are mainly killing Sunnis now, not US troops. This is so obvious, but unfortunately these new set of lies are challenged by so few people, just like in the lead up to the Iraq War. People are more skeptical now, but not nearly skeptical enough as the war machine revs up again.

Cenk Uygur's diary

The LA Times at least has written an excellent piece explaining why these charges against Iran are lies. The Bush administration also warns of Iranian WMD, when every expert in the field says they wouldn't even have the capacity for a nuclear weapon another five to ten years. Gee, where have I heard lies about WMD before?

The lies that this administration clearly told about
Iraq is more than enough to impeach the president and the vice president. They purposely lied during the State of the Union speech, they lied that they knew where the weapons of mass destruction were and they lied that they were certain that Saddam had them. Certain! Really, then where are they?!

They repeatedly insinuated and outright claimed that Iraq was complicit in the attacks against us on 9/11. That is a grotesque lie. Imagine if
Roosevelt had lied about who attacked us at Pearl Harbor and brought us to war with China instead of Japan. Would that not be an impeachable offense?

If you insist on a violation of law for impeachment, not just gross violation of the public trust, then the Bush administration can accommodate you there as well. They brag about how they have been in violation of a federal law for five years now. They broke the FISA law - and they admit it.
Mission accomplished. Bush and Cheney are felons according to the law. Will you impeach them already?

Why do I care so much to impeach these guys? Because, unlike conventional wisdom, I don't think we are going to be able to run out the clock on them. They are going to do something even more hideous before the next two years are up. Every week, Michael Hirsh from Newsweek comes on our show and tells us we have no choice but to hold our nose for two years and wait out this administration.

But that's not true. If our legislators were truly courageous, they would have a choice. That choice is impeachment. It is completely warranted and completely necessary.

Look, for me this is not a political thing. I don't give a damn which party is in power, as long as they do reasonable things. I thought George H. W. Bush was an excellent foreign policy president. I voted against Bill Clinton twice, but came to regret it because I thought he also did an excellent job in foreign policy.

I thought the
Clinton impeachment proceedings were hideous and ridiculous. It is part of what drove me away from the Republican Party. But this is not the same. This is clearly not some sort of silly political vendetta; this is a matter of grave national importance. If you can't see the difference there, you are being willfully ignorant to the facts.

Most likely, my warnings here and the warnings of many others will be disregarded. We will be branded as the extremists, as the real extremists prepare for another horrible war.

As the real extremists continue to trample upon our constitution (it makes my blood boil every time I think about the Military Commissions Act and how twelve unprincipled, pathetically weak Democratic Senators and every so-called moderate Republican, like Chuck Hagel, voted for that atrocity).

As the real extremists continue to break the law and spy on American citizens without court orders. As the real extremists ignore Congress altogether with their so-called signing statements and authorize torture.

And all of this we might be able to bear, as we have gotten used to the lawlessness and the grotesqueries of this administration. But if they start another war with
Iran, they will take all of this to another level. And then we, the alarmists, will be proven right - once again. And for our correct assessment, we will, once again, be ignored and marginalized.

Then in 2008 when the Republicans are run out of town en masse and the party is nearly finished historically, people will say, "Why didn't someone warn us?" Well, I'm warning you now. Impeachment isn't for the sake of the Democrats. They stand to gain nearly universal power if this administration actually starts a disastrous war with
Iran. Nobody will vote for a Republican on the national level for another twenty years.

It's the Republicans who have to realize that this administration threatens their very existence. A war with
Iran? Gas prices at ten dollars a gallon, bombings all over the world, our troops trapped in the Middle East, trillions wasted. How on God's green earth do you think you're going to recover from that?

There are only two possible answers. No, the war with
Iran will go great. If you think that, you are so irrational that talking to you is a waste of time anyway. Or no, Bush and Cheney aren't that crazy. Do you really want to take your chances on that? Every single thing they have done so far indicates they are that crazy! And that's what you're betting your whole party on? That Dick Cheney and George Bush will be restrained? Good luck.

Please, either for your own political advantage or for the antiquated idea of actually helping the country, remove these guys from power before they do more damage. Otherwise, we will all live to regret it.

We The People - Part II Impeachment: A Moral Impe...
By poputonian(digby)
Impeachment: A Moral Imperative A stay-at-home mom convinced a newly-elected State Senator to tread where others feared. Listen (and watch) as Senator Oemig from
Washington State -- a Democrat with a conscience -- speaks for us, ...
Hullabaloo -

Impeachment measure cites intel failures, state casualties
Oemig is relying on US House rules that say petitions "from the country at large" can be presented to the House as well as a parliamentary manual that says impeachment can be instigated by a state legislature. The joint memorial will be ..
Postman on Politics -

Dave Lindorff: Inappropriate Behavior and Impeachment
BuzzFlash - Chicago,IL,USA
If there is any sense of integrity, courage, and patriotism abroad in the nation at large, we will see resolutions of impeachment passed in coming weeks in ...

Discuss: Is Impeachment Worth It?
The NewStandard -
Some say that the odds of convincing Congress to pursue impeachment are so slim that the focus should be on more pressing issues, such as pulling US troops

Towns to face impeachment, war questions
Barre Montpelier Times Argus - Barre,VT,USA
NEWFANE – Twenty-three Vermont communities have placed town meeting questions calling for President Bush's impeachment on the agenda this year and just as ...
See all stories on this topic

Doug Giebel: Rampant Cynicism (press release) -
New Zealand
... but if they are permitted to leave office without facing impeachment hearings, the two men most responsible for fiscal irresponsibility, arrogance and­­_

America! If You Will Not Impeach This Tyrant Who Will You Impeach?
OpEdNews - Newtown,PA,USA
If you, my fellow Americans, will not demand the impeachment of the worst president in American history, a man who is a traitor to our Constitution, ...
See all stories on this topic

Keep your eye on the ball- impeachment now!
OpEdNews - Newtown,PA,USA
Are Obama, Kucinich and the rest aware that they are impeding impeachment by creating media events, or are they merely patsies? ...
See all stories on this topic

Lewes vigils expand to to cinclude cries for impeachment
Cape Gazette - Lewes,DE,USA
“That was in fact an impeachment march. We found out that people from all over the country

Bush Opponents Differ over Impeachment
The NewStandard -
Impeachment activists, however, will have an uphill battle. The Democratic leadership seems set on keeping the idea "off the table," forcing progressives to ...

Alert for: impeachment

Impeachment Emergency Summit
By ddjango(ddjango)
I encourage you to swamp Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid with emails demanding that they put impeachment back on the table. Bush can continue to wear ear plugs, the DP leadership must take their's out. ...
P! -

23 Towns Take Up Impeachment Resolution
By Ticia
Twenty-three Vermont communities have placed town meeting questions calling for President Bush's impeachment on the agenda this year and just as many towns will also be voting on whether the
United States should withdraw its troops from ...
TPMCafe blogs -

Twenty-three towns take up Bush impeachment resolution
Organizers of the impeachment resolution had hoped to reach 30 to 50 towns but say the topic will come up in more communities during town meeting discussions of other business. Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan, known for camping outside ... - Impeach... -

Conyers and Kucinich for Impeachment if Bush Attacks Iran
By Bryan Buchan
Conyers and Kucinich for Impeachment if Bush Attacks
Iran Congressmen John Conyers and Dennis Kucinich have suggested that they are for impeachment of Bush if he attacks Iran. ...
Progressive Democrats of America Blog -

Anti-war activists "salivate" at thought of impeachment
Eric told us he hadn't run for the State Senate with the intention of leading a charge for impeachment. He had many priorities in mind, and commitment to many progressive causes, such as alternative energy development. ...

By Buddhagem
If a national movement calling for the impeachment of the President is rapidly ... Believe it or not there is a national movement for impeachment. ... A movement to Impeach Bush for War Crimes can quickly advance the whole struggle; ...

The Blue Voice -

Is That Impeachment I Smell
The latest:. It’s finally becoming clear why ex-White House mouthpiece Ari Fleischer took the fifth and had to be granted immunity from prosecution in the case: Washington Post reporter Walter Pincus testified that Fleischer leaked the
T. Rex's Guide to Life -

NYC Impeachment Summit
By heuer
I'm driving from
North Carolina to NYC this Friday (2.16.7) for the impeachment meeting Saturday and Sunday. I'm trolling for a patch of floor to roll out my bedroll. Will trade wine and song for floor space. Peace and Solidarity, ...
North Jersey Impeach Group -... -

IMPEACH? Hell yes! Senator Eric Oemig comes out swinging
By dinazina
If it passes, this will reach the floor of the US House of Representatives--and may lead to the

impeachment of Bush, Cheney, and other officials who've exhibited an unprecedented contempt for the US Constitution. ...
Washblog - Front Page -

By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)
... rejected resoundingly in the November Elections, surrounded with scandals, corruption, investigations, mounting Impeachment talk and preparations in as yet “private quarters”, marches and protests growing in frequency, ...
Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes -

By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)
From Ed. Dickau ( ).
America's Not Ready to Make Nice The Nation., NY - 2 hours ago John Nichols' new book is THE GENIUS OF IMPEACHMENT: The Founders' Cure for Royalism. Rolling Stone's Tim Dickinson ...
Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes -

By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)
LETTER NO.1 These are dangerous times, made so not only by technologies that can reduce our world to a barren charcoal briquette floating silently in the icy void of space, and those that can persuade our species to alter their ...
Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes -


By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)
Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes. Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes ... Ed. Dickau:
Alexandria, Virginia, US: A political activist since his

Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes: IMPEACHMENT: A MATTER OF WHAT ...
By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)

Ed. Dickau: A political activist since his Freshman year in college, Ed. began ... down to the precinct level has earned him the title : "Precinct Master". ...

By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)

Organizers have vowed to make “Impeachment” a daily news hour word. ... Ed. Dickau: A political activist since his Freshman year in college, Ed. began his ...

By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)

Author encourages impeachment vote. The Barre Montpelier Times Argus - 1 hour, ... Ed. Dickau: A political activist since his Freshman year in college, Ed. ...

Jeremy Laing Collections in the Blogs



By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)
One of the central purposes of The Precinct Master is to report regularly and with immediacy on the political, social, economic and cultural activism that ...

More Than You Ever Wanted To Know About The Secret Service
By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)
IMPEACHMENT THOUGHTS FOR THE DAY…Because nobody’s life, liberty or property is safe while Congress is in session or the White House is occupied. Ethics is not about what we say or what we intend, it's about what we do. ...
The Reference Room -

Blogger: User Profile: Ed. Dickau
Ed. Dickau. Age: 65; Gender: Male; Astrological Sign: Scorpio; Zodiac Year: Snake ... Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes. Computer Alerts And Links ...

Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes: IMPEACHMENT: WAR CRIMES ...
By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)


George Eastman Design in the Blogs
January 15, 2007 04:38 AM ...


By Ed, Dickau(Ed, Dickau)

Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes. Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes ... Ed. Dickau: Alexandria, Virginia, US: A political activist since his Freshman ...

No comments: