impeach bush for peace peach
(Go to our Main Page:ImpeachForPeace.org)

Add to Google

Daily Impeachment News:

March 5, 2008

[Video] Rep. Welch Censured for Not Impeaching Bush

Filed under: Impeachment Progress News,Vermont — Jodin Morey @ 11:58 pm


Vermont Town Meeting 2008
Montgomery Center, Vermont
Censure Motion of Peter Welch (VT US Rep)


[Video] Bush/Cheney Indictment Vote in VT

Filed under: Impeachment Events,Vermont — Jodin Morey @ 9:57 pm


US President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney Indictment Vote Brattleboro, Vermont March 4, 2008.


March 4, 2008

Vermont towns approve Bush/Cheney ‘indictments’ – call for arrests

Filed under: Impeachment Progress News,Vermont — Mikael @ 7:56 pm

cgwelcome1crop300.jpgResidents of Vermont Towns Vote to Support Hypothetical Bush-Cheney Indictment

JOHN CURRAN
AP News

Voters in two Vermont towns approved measures Tuesday calling for the indictment of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for what they consider violations of the Constitution.

More symbolic than anything, the items sought to have police arrest Bush and Cheney if they ever visit Brattleboro or nearby Marlboro or to extradite them for prosecution elsewhere — if they’re not impeached first.

In Brattleboro, the vote was 2,012-1,795. In Marlboro, which held a town meeting on the issue, it was 43-25 with three abstentions.

“I hope the one thing that people take from this is, ‘Hey, it can be done,’” said Kurt Daims, 54, who organized the petition drive that led to the Brattleboro vote.

The measure in Marlboro isn’t binding because it didn’t appear on the warning for the meeting, according to Nora Wilson.

“It was emotional. There were heartfelt speeches on both sides,” Wilson said.

The question put to voters in Brattleboro referred to “crimes against our Constitution” but did not specify the allegations.

In Brattleboro, a steady stream of voters paraded into the Union High School gym to cast their ballots on a day when school board elections and Vermont’s presidential primary were also on the slate.

Voters interviewed after casting ballots said they saw the article as an opportunity to express their frustration over the war in Iraq and Bush’s tenure in general.

“I realize it’s an extreme thing to do, and really silly in a way,” said Robert George, 74, a retired photographer. “But I’m really angry about us getting involved in the war in Iraq and him (Bush) disrespecting the will of the people.”

Ian Kelley, 41, a radio DJ, said he didn’t vote on the article.

“It’s not a good reflection on the town,” he said. “Do I like either of them and would I vote for them? No. But I don’t think it’s cause to arrest them.”

Barbara Southworth, a 66-year-old nurse, said she would have voted against it.

“I forgot to vote because it was on the flip side,” she said.

The White House press office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment, but a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee denounced the indictment effort.

“It appears that the left wing knows no bounds in their willingness to waste taxpayer dollars to make a futile counterproductive partisan political point,” said Blair Latoff. “Town people would be much better served by elected officials who sought to solve problems rather than create them.”

(Original Article)


March 3, 2008

Will Police from Brattleboro, Vt., Arrest Bush and Cheney?

Filed under: Impeachment Progress News,Vermont — Mikael @ 3:20 pm

brat_1.JPGScoop
Opinion: David Swanson

The abuse inflicted on our nation by the current president and vice president makes a lot of people angry. Responding with violence would be foolish and counterproductive. Responding with an election might be cathartic, but would not solve the problem. The only response that can work is one that calls the crimes what they are and upholds the rule of law. If we had really gotten this right under Nixon or Reagan or Clinton, we might have prevented some of the same people involved back then from committing new offenses.

Raise your hand if you are a Republican who wants Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to have the power to spy without warrants, detain without charges, torture, murder, and rewrite any law passed by Congress.

(Source)


February 25, 2008

Maine: Senate Candidate to File Indictment Against Bush/Cheney

Filed under: Impeachment Progress News,Maine,Vermont — Jodin Morey @ 10:08 am

[IFP endorses no candidates for federal political office. We support any call for accountability of all public office holders]
(Kennebunkport) Independent US Senate candidate Laurie Dobson has announced plans to file a formal Writ of Indictment against President Bush and Vice President Cheney next Tuesday, Feb. 26, at Kennebunkport Town Hall. If passed by the town’s Board of Selectmen, it could result in the arrest of Bush and/or Cheney if they visit Kennebunkport.

“Our nation has reached a point where it is imperative for us to take action to hold this administration accountable,” Dobson said. “The Constitution gives citizens the right to pursue these war criminals and bring them to justice. The federal government has been reluctant to do it. As a candidate for the US Senate, I feel I have a duty to pursue and present this indictment for the citizens of my town, the state of Maine, the entire country and the world my children live in.”

Dobson plans to file the Writ at Kennebunkport town offices on Elm St. next Tuesday “at high noon.” A brief news conference will immediately follow, at which time copies of the Writ and supporting legal opinions will be made available.

At 12:30 pm, a photo opportunity will be held with a backdrop of the Bush Estate at Walker’s Point, followed by interviews and a Q&A at 78 Old Cape Rd., Kennebunkport.

The Writ reads, in part:

“Shall the Kennebunkport Board of Selectmen instruct the Town Attorney to draft indictments against President Bush and Vice President Cheney for crimes against our Constitution, and publish said indictments for consideration by other authorities, and shall it be the law of the Town of Kennebunkport that the Kennebunkport Police, pursuant to the above-mentioned indictments, arrest and detain George W. Bush and Richard Cheney in Kennebunkport if they are not duly impeached, and prosecute or extradite them to other authorities that may reasonably contend to prosecute them.”

If passed, Dobson’s initiative will be the second one of its kind. A similar indictment was recently passed by the Board of Selectmen in Brattleboro VT, and will be voted on in a townwide referendum on March 4.


Next Page »

"I just want you to know that,
when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace."
-Bush, June 18, 2002

"War is Peace"
-Big Brother in George Orwell's 1984

Do-It-Yourself
Impeachment
Blog Categories
Our Whole Site

As heard on
the radio...
Bush hears the voices logo
KFAI radio interview
"I Hear The Voices"
Oct 5th Ad
• Oct 5th Interview
Mike Malloy
Peter Werbe
Get Impeach For Peace Stuff!
(pins, bumper stickers, hats, etc.)
Impeach Bush for Peace Stuff logo
protest picture
Calendar

Picts/Vid
Why Should Bush Have Been Impeached?Charges against Bush

Charges & Evidence


Videos

Bush's Defense
Arguments Against Bush Impeachment...

• If we impeach Bush, we’ll get President Cheney!
The first impeachment resolution introduced by McKinney included Bush, Cheney, and Rice. Although, even if we only initially pursue Bush, initiating the impeachment process will lead to an investigation that will implicate lots of people in the Bush administration who are guilty of committing crimes, including Cheney.

No matter who we get to replace Bush, we’ll be showing those in power that anyone who breaks the law will be held accountable.

• Promoting impeachment will seem too “extreme.”
Demanding that crimes be investigated is NOT extreme. Some previous impeachment attempts were considered extreme because they were pursued for actions that didn't rise to the level of a Constitutional crisis, which is what the impeachment tool is meant to be used for. Nixon's impeachment, however, was bipartisan.

  • We should wait to impeach...
Wait to impeach? We've waited 3 or more years too long already. We had enough evidence to impeach years ago. Remember, an impeachment only means you have enough evidence to warrant a trial, just like an indictment. Our congress people didn't take an oath to bipartisanship. They took an oath to the Constitution. Besides which, our troops, Iraqi civilians, and our own civil liberties are all waiting for this.
 
• Before we impeach, we should get some legislation passed...
And with unconstitutional Presidential Signing Statements, veto power, and the power of "Commander in Chief" at his disposal, how do you think Congress is going to get anything accomplished without first impeaching Bush?

If your tire blows while you're driving, do you stop to fix it? Or do you continue driving on your rim because to stop would take too much time?

• It hurts the democracy to go through a presidential impeachment. And Bush is a lame duck anyway.
Holding government officials accountable for their actions strengthens our democracy. Letting lawlessness stand weakens it.

Sometimes reprimanding a child (president) doesn't make the family (Washington) a happy place. But you still have to do it so the child and his siblings (future presidents) learn about accountability. Impeachment is horribly UNDERUSED, which is part of why there's so much corruption at the top. Politicians must learn to fear it. People think things are better because we improved the make-up of our law-making body, Congress. But Bush is BREAKING LAWS. So, it doesn't matter how many laws Congress passes if they don't serve their OVERSIGHT duties as well by impeaching. They swore to defend the Constitution. What are laws without enforcement?

Besides, considering Bush's track-record of breaking laws, he can still do a lot of damage. Our troops, Iran, and our Supreme Court are all endangered so long as he remains in office. Waiting until Bush is out of office will leave us complicit in any further crimes he commits. The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated that the death toll from a "tactical" nuclear weapon of the kind Bush is contemplating using in Iran would be at minimum 3 million men, women, and children. The path of death would stretch across country boundaries into India.

Perhaps worst of all, we set a terrible precedent by allowing Bush to stay in office after he's broken so many laws. Impeachment will stop future presidents from using Bush's actions as justification for even more lawbreaking and erosion of civil liberties.

• I'm a Democrat/
Republican. If we support impeachment it will lower the chances of my party winning in 2008.

So, your party would rather win elections than do what's right for the country? I hope you're wrong. I also hope the public is willing to throw additional support to any party that holds our elected officials accountable for their actions. This has been historically true with every single impeachment effort launched. And this impeachment effort would begin with majority support (unlike most past impeachments including Nixon).

• Impeachment will never happen. Congress members will block it.
Well, all we need is a majority of support in the House. And 2/3rds vote in the Senate to remove Bush from office will happen once the evidence gets aired on the floor of the House, and subsequently the national media outlets. The political pressure will become too great.

Today's impossibility is tomorrow's reality. Congress members will realize that tying their political future to Bush reduces their chances of getting elected. Remember, one way or another, Bush is gone by 2009— but members of Congress may retain their offices beyond that date. Bush's poll numbers are extremely low, and most Americans support impeachment. This is a bipartisan movement. This means that if we make the pressure unbearable for Members of Congress, they'll turn on him to keep their own seats (like they did with Nixon). It's already starting to happen. While many Members of Congress have behaved unethically in the last few years, it's important to understand that this is related to their warped view of what's in their self-interest. Let's wake them up to their true self-interest (impeaching the president), by showing them our support for impeachment.

And even if we only impeach, and the Senate fails to do their duty and remove him from office, it will only implicate the Senators who fail to do their sworn Constitutional duty.

• But Speaker of the House Pelosi said that Impeachment was "off the table."

Pelosi most likely said this to remove any appearance of conflict-of-interest that would arise if she were thrust into the presidency as a result of the coming impeachment. What we need to do is to pressure Pelosi not to interfere with impeachment maneuverings within her party. Sending her Do-It-Yourself impeachments legitimizes her when she joins the impeachment movement in the future.

(Read More)