impeach bush for peace peach
(Go to our Main

Add to Google

Daily Impeachment News:

March 31, 2009

Spanish courts prosecution of Bush attorneys may be start to going after Cheney

Filed under: Impeachment News — Mikael @ 7:28 pm

Turley: Spanish courts may be building case against Cheney
David Edwards and Stephen C. Webster

According to constitutional law expert Jonathan Turley, the prosecution of Bush’s so-called “torture lawyers” might just give Spanish prosecutors the “low lying fruit” needed to bring a case against Vice President Cheney.

Appearing on Monday night’s edition of MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann, George Washington University law professor Turley said that although President Obama is “protecting” the former administration from prosecution, the Spanish investigation could serve as a point of leverage.

By targeting attorneys who wrote legal justifications for torture, said Turley, prosecutors are going “for the first line of defendants.”

“And then if you have a case, you go for the higher ones,” he added.

Referencing Seymor Hersh’s allegation that an “executive assassination ring” reported directly to the former Vice President — and the apparent confirmation of the allegation’s veracity by a former Cheney aide — Olbermann wondered, “Should the Spanish prosecutors be taking notes?””

“It’s well known the Obama administration is protecting President Bush and Vice President Cheney from criminal investigation,” he concluded. “And if he went after the two of them, the U.S. government could move aggressively to shut down the inquiry.”



  1. Well folks lets get this prosecution going,,,

    Comment by Den — April 3, 2009 @ 9:19 pm

  2. Anyone with half a brain knows that the US. administration will never be punished for crimes against humanity much less torture! The United States has engaged in this type of human rights violations for many years, and always will! Furthermore, the US. has brought all of humanity to the start of the 3rd world war, with no end in sight. I am personally scared for us, for with the United States as the worlds “police Force”, our ultimate demise is assured. Just look at the mess they have made of Iraq. Every day there is more and more death and destruction and it is getting worse, not better! The administration lied in the first place to justify invading Iraq. Sure is funny to me that no weapons of mass destruction have been found,but that was the reason to justify the invasion of a smaller country by the allmighty U.S.of A! The only reason for the invasion was for oil; and dear old dad not being smart enough to get that benenevolent despot out of power. Therefore his equally witless son needed to finish the job,therby fortifying his countries continued control of the world! I shudder to think where this world is headed. Where is the sence of responsibility that people should be feeling? The ability to think of others,instead of youself? I am sickened that this new guy seems just as bad as the last. He seems to still adhere to the same lies and nonsence as his previous “mentor” and that scares me a great deal! I pity us as a race; and am extremely fearful for our continued wellbeing with the U.S. as big brother! God help us all.

    Comment by Rob Engel — April 12, 2009 @ 9:25 am

  3. I would like to know why the news agency’s did not go after Bush and Cheney when they were doing all these things that lead up to this mess. Bush walked away like a cartoon character sucking the world economy behind him along with our good standing in the world community. If CNN had stayed on Bush and Cheney as they have Tot Mom or Bootlip Mom, is there an unwritten rule that Republications can skate, but Dem’s can’t? I want to know why the missing emails aren’t still being discussed, or the failure of regulations, how did the Gov. Agency miss Maydoff? Forgive my spelling. Why?

    Comment by Robin Franklin — April 13, 2009 @ 8:38 am

  4. impeach Obama!!!

    Comment by Den — April 16, 2009 @ 2:36 pm

  5. Phillip J. Berg 9/11 International Voices

    Berg on 9/11

    Comment by Den — April 26, 2009 @ 7:30 am

  6. Spain you did it to Pinochet.I can only hope you can get these S.O.B’s.GO SPAIN GO!

    Comment by Jim Lee — May 29, 2009 @ 5:48 pm

  7. Instead of torture.Why wasn’t certain drugs used to obtain information? they are quicker,and a less volatile topic.

    Comment by Jim Lee — May 29, 2009 @ 5:55 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

"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

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

Why Should Bush Have Been Impeached?Charges against Bush

Charges & Evidence


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)