|Daily Impeachment News:
June 21, 2008
[IFP does not endorse any federal candidate only encourages accountability of all politicans]
This was just sent to us from
Dan Reale — First, thank you for your work. It would be great if the two party system really cared about impeachment.
I’m running for Congress in CT’s 2nd district against a democratic opponent who won’t support impeachment. I say that Congress has its own jail and a sargeant at arms, and we should put them to use.
I am for the immediate impeachment and trial of George Bush and Dick Cheney for more than 30 seperate offenses.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact me.
Yours in Liberty,
Candidate for Congress
January 5, 2008
Steve Fournier OpedNews — John Larson responded in writing to the 12 questions posed by Greater Hartford Impeach several weeks ago, but he supplied answers to none of them. Through aide John Rossi, he sent me a package consisting of a two-page letter and a two-inch thick looseleaf binder of selected resources bearing on the issue of executive accountability, including a congressional guide to the impeachment function that was published ten years ago by the Congressional Research Service and several hundred pages from the Congressional Record of various hearings.
You may remember that I left a letter with Larson just before Thanksgiving asking directly whether he believes this president has acted criminally in lying to Congress about Iraq, holding prisoners without legal process, corrupting the federal prosecutorial function, torturing prisoners, and spying on Americans without a warrant, among other crimes. He was also asked to acknowledge that Congress is the sole law enforcement authority in the case of presidential criminality and that he will set a precedent if he fails to hold this president accountable.
In his letter, Larson expresses sympathy for the position of Greater Hartford Impeach and claims he shares our “frustration and outrage at the Bush Administration.”
“Your patriotic duty and call for immediate action from Congress are not unjusitified,” he adds. “I believe we must restore a system of checks and balances in our federal government and reassert the authority of Congress. While the Constitution provides for impeachment under Article 1 we must take great care in following the rule of law in pusuing such action, no matter how vigilant and emotional we feel about this war. This should start with revisiting the War Powers Act . . .”
From there, Larson digresses to criticize Republicans for the impeachment of Bush’s predecessor. He goes on to discuss the congressional oversight function and boasts about the number of hearings held. No comment from him on what Congress might do about the findings of these various hearings, which document instance of after instance of malfeasance and criminality.
Larson emphasizes the role of Republicans as an impediment to legislative progress, deducing that “legislative difficulties underscore the challenge of securing the necessary two-thirds majority for a conviction in the Senate.” The prosecutors of the Nazis at Nuremberg could have said the same thing about the challenges facing their quest for official accountability.
Larson’s conclusion: “I believe that to knowingly move forward with an impeachment that cannot succeeed would only serve political purposes, vindicate the President and not serve our rule of law.” He knows how a trial would come out, he’s saying, without even looking at the evidence, much less discussing it. His implication is that his colleagues in the other house are altogether corrupt and could not reach a a fair verdict. And by this logic, Larson feels he is serving the rule of law. If Larson’s logic had prevailed in 1945, Hermann Goering might have lived out his days comfortably in New Jersey.
We asked Larson explicit questions about criminal conduct at the top of the executive branch and his constitutional duty to hold the wrongdoers accountable, and he parried them with digressions and diversions and answered not a single one. It was a cynical response, intellectually dishonest, baldly political, and insulting to anyone who seeks an accounting, which Larson considers an abuse of the constitutional process.
You might want to give Larson’s office a call at (860) 278-8888 to confirm that he has no intention of discussing the abundant evidence of criminal conduct and malfeasance on the part of the President of the United States and that he’s satisfied with the precedent he’s setting for future presidents.
September 30, 2007
Yalies for the Impeachment of George Bush and Richard Cheney
With great privilege comes great responsibility
If not us, who? If not now, when?
A call for the impeachment of a president is not one to be taken lightly. But when the foundations of constitutional government are in mortal danger, it is time to raise our full voices. Politicians will always be politicians and thus prone to peccadillo, but George Bush and Dick Cheney have so grievously violated their oaths of office to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States” that the only remedy is impeachment. With respect to the Fourth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment, the oath has been clearly broken. The First Amendment is under attack, as peaceful, protected speech is increasingly subject to arrest and harassment.
Yale president Kingman Brewster taught us that from whom much has been given, much is expected. We knew not what form of courage would be called from us in repayment of our debt, as no generation does. The courage to risk opprobrium and contempt is sometimes as important as the courage to raise arms in national defense. Brewster showed moral courage by making Yale a meritocracy, incurring wrath from many quarters.
By manipulation of fear, faulty but seductive logic, and outright lies, this administration has steered our republic toward unaccountable tyranny, which our nation overthrew at its founding. No man is above the law. It falls to those of us who by our education are trained in rational inquiry and critical thinking to strip the mask of patriotism and sole possession of the truth from George Bush, and to foment the debate that so far has been avoided by our nation. Of course, most important is the participation of those who disagree. We welcome open debate. It is the lifeblood of democracy.
If not us, who? If not now, when? Not only is it possible for impeachment to succeed; it is vital. If George Bush and Dick Cheney are simply allowed to leave office, our level of tolerance for lawbreaking among our highest officials will have expanded by breathtaking orders of magnitude, and will become a permanent part of our political culture. The Law of the Land will be the law of the land no more.
Although other resolutions and articles of impeachment have been put forward by the public, the essential case for the impeachment of first Dick Cheney, then George Bush are:
-Violation of the oath of office to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution, specifically the Sixth Amendment right of American citizens, in criminal matters, to be told of the charges against them, to counsel, and a to speedy and public trial by a jury of their peers. The rights of foreign nationals may be debated, but the rights of Americans are not open to debate. They are stated clearly in the Constitution, and “enemy combatant” precedents obviously cannot apply to a vaguely defined “war on terror” intended to have an infinite horizon. Jose Padilla was detained and tortured for 4 1/2 years in violation of his rights, and the administration to this day claims the authority to do so to any American it accuses of terrorism.
-A corollary charge, seeking to overturn the Bill of Rights of the Constitution by the transparent device of claiming wartime powers which would last forever.
-Violation of the oath of office to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution, specifically the Fourth Amendment right to freedom from search without a warrant, in the NSA warrantless surveillance scandal. The media assists the administration in twisting the issue to be whether or not the government can spy, when in fact the government has always been authorized to spy on anyone as long as it does so within the law, with a warrant obtained before or even after the fact. Referring to this, former Nixon White House Counsel John Dean says Bush is the only president in history who has openly admitted an “impeachable offense.”
-Lying to Congress and the American people to draw the country into the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
-Giving secrets to the enemy in wartime by ordering the public identification of American intelligence agent Valerie Plame, which constitutes treason, because Plame was engaged in tracing weapons of mass destruction before they reached American shores.
Please support our efforts to force Congress to begin impeachment proceedings against Vice President Richard Cheney immediately. Add your name, Yale class, and your own views on this blog register and discussion. History will judge us for what we did or did not do at this fork in the road of our republic. Let history judge us favorably.
- Ralph Lopez, T.D. ’82
- Mark Konick, T.D. ’82
September 21, 2007
The Middletown Press — The city Democratic Committee unanimously passed a resolution calling for he impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney in an effort to make a statement that Bush has committed serious enough crimes to be removed from office, said Councilman Gerald Daley.
While the resolution won’t actually result in the president’s impeachment, Daley said he hopes it will make a statement that will influence not only city residents, but future decisions made by the congressional delegation on a national level.
“This is intended to bring awareness among the public as well as our congressional delegation,” Daley said. “There was a vote in the senate yesterday that would require that deployments in Iraq be no longer than the respites between tours and it fell short by four votes.”
“Joe Lieberman was one of the votes. Maybe this will make him think twice about doing something like that the next time a similar vote comes up. People have to get engaged in this – the future is at stake here.”
The only other councilman in attendance, Robert Santangelo, said the resolution shows that “people are not pleased with the way things are being done.”
Santangelo applauded Daley for bringing the resolution forward, adding that this resolution gives the Democrats a voice and that the Democratic Committee has not been vocal enough in the past.
Next Page »
September 13, 2007
Congressional Candidate Raises Call for Impeachment
Submitted by davidswanson
From Harold Burbank
Canton, Connecticut, civl rights attorney Harold Burbank has begun a campaign to challenge US Representative Chris Murphy for his 5th Congressional District seat in the 2008 election over the issue of impeachment. Burbank, a GHW Bush recommendee to law school and succesful defender of Ralph Nader’s 2004 presidential campaign in Burbank’s home state of Maine, where Maine Democrats sought to sue the Nader-Camejo ticket off the Maine ballot and lost, says it is time to stop kidding ourselves about the necessity of impeachment, to end the human, financial and legal costs of offending decades of international human rights law and policy which the US helped to create, that is solidy grounded in the the most prescient of our US Constitution principles.
“Congressman Murphy, an attorney and Congressman sworn to uphold the Constitution, refuses to acknowledge that our wars of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan offend the most basic protections of the US Constitution for our people. Our citizens, military, treasury and futures stand at extreme at risk due to the criminal war adventurism of the Bush administration, which will only be stopped by impeaching GW Bush, Richard Cheney and Condoleeza Rice. Despite overwhelming evidence that this administration lied and scared us into current wars, with no end in sight, and which threaten wider war in Iran, Syria and beyond, it is time for the people to elect candidates who will say “No” to more soldiers, more money and more unending risks in middle east and threatened new imperial wars. I will be that kind of candidate and that kind of congressman. My first act as congressman will be to submit articles of impeachment against any exective branch official who continues to lead us in these wars, and who does not uphold the Constitution by ending them immediately. Connecticut’s 5th district voters will have a clear chance to help end these wars on election day. I will also campaign tirelessly and immediately to persuade Congressman Murphy to submit impeachment articles now, which he has said many times that he will not.”
Burbank said that he would consider withdrawing his candidacy if Congressman Murphy submits articles of impeachment immediately, and calls for immediate defunding of the wars. Meanwile, he is seeking enodrsements from his friend and former client Ralph Nader, and had email from Cindy Sheehan yesterday encouraging his candidacy.
“On some issues Chris Murphy has worked hard for his constituents, but he lacks the courage to lead in crisis. Unlike Ralph Nader and Cindy Sheehan, he does not grasp that if the administration is not impeached, his children and mine will confront WW III. There are no progressive experts in the fields of international relations, law, politics and religion who doubt this outcome unless the US immediately withdraws from the middle east, and begins to work with the United Nations to formulate new policies for regional peace and stability there. The UN is hard at work on such policies already, but Congressman Murphy does not seem to know or care about them.”
Burbank’s public service to date includes posts as Connecticut and Maine assistant attorney general, Penobscot Indian Nation (Maine) director of human services; Veterans for Peace delegate to the United Nations and charity groups for the disabled and poor of Africa. He holds the BA and MA degrees in international affairs plus the JD, and is admitted to the Conneticut, Connecticut federal, Maine and US Supreme Court bars. Currently he is a solo civil rights lawyer based in Canton, Connecticut, where he has lived for 17 years. He has been married 27 years to Marianne Humphrey of Canton, Connecticut, and has two children, one each in high school and college. He would appreciate hearing from anyone interested in his campaign at firstname.lastname@example.org
"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