Articles of Impeachment for Bush

[Bravus]

Or Wright has ramped up his rhetoric recently

[there buster]

Quote:

Or Wright has ramped up his rhetoric recently

That must be it. All those DVD's on sale from many years past must be faked.

And Tony Rezko must have just gotten mobbed up.

And Fr. Pfleger must have recently ramped up.

And William Ayers must have only recently bombed innocent people. No, that was thirty years ago.

Here's what he said recently:

Quote:

Ayers was asked by an interviewer for the PBS television program Independent Lens, "How do you feel about what you did? Would you do it again under similar circumstances?" He replied:

"I’ve thought about this a lot. Being almost 60, it’s impossible to not have lots and lots of regrets about lots and lots of things, but the question of did we do something that was horrendous, awful? ... I don’t think so. I think what we did was to respond to a situation that was unconscionable."

According to Ayers, his radical past occasionally affects him, as when, by his account, he was asked not to attend a progressive educators' conference in the fall of 2006 on the basis that the organizers did not want to risk an association with his past.

Yes, you must be right. Barry -- oops! sorry, tha's Barack now-- Barack Obama is the one fixed star in the heavens; everyone else suddenly changed.

[Bravus]

Not what I said, but never mind: I've recognised once again that we live in entirely different worlds and are attempting to communicate across unassailable barriers of basic assumption, so will be withdrawing. Please feel free to consider this yet another victory of good sense over woolly leftist confusion.

[Neil D]

Quote:

Some people have accused Bush of not being the most intelligent President. But wait until you get the Bama man. He will certainly need the 20 years to learn the job. But can we afford to wait for him to learn it?? That is the question.

Red, I know that you know that there are stupid bigoted people in the SDA church...but I don't see you, nor your wife, leaving. Why do you insist on Obama leaving his church so early? In fact, if you are looking for a perfect church, let me know, will you? I would like the oppertunity to point out as gently as possible that once you join it, it will no longer be a perfect church....

[Dr. Shane]

I feel for Obama because I grew up without a father too. I am sure he has always been latching on to different men as father figures and Reverend Wright was probably one of them. Yea, I believe Obama when he said that he considered Reverend Wright like a crazy old uncle. The sad thing is it looks like the feeling wasn't mutual and Reverend Wright stabbed Obama in the back when he went to the press club. My sympathy for Obama is almost enough to make be vote for him but that is something he is going to have to work a bit harder to get.

[there buster]

Quote:

unassailable barriers of basic assumption

You mean, those DVD's are all fake?

Jeremiah Wright didn't say those things all those years ago?

These things have nothing to do with basic assumptions, and everything to do with evidence. I didn't assume Jeremiah Wright existed: I'd never heard of him more than a couple of years ago.

I didn't assume Obama said "This isn't the (fill in the blank) I've known for twenty years." I simply noted it.

I also note that Presidents only get to serve two terms, considerably less than that twenty year period.

I'd be quite interested in what 'basic assumptions' you have in mind, and how they differ.

My very liberal, Jewish history professor gave me a crash course in unexamined assumptions in 1967 and '68. Something I've been forever grateful for. He forced me to think. And then Emmet Vande Vere at Andrews continued that demanding task. Once again, I'm grateful. So I've been assiduously studying such things for about 40 years now. An important, necessary topic.

[carolaa]

From impeachbush.org:

Breaking News. This from the desk of Florida Congressman Robert Wexler, one of the co-sponsors of the 35 articles of impeachment introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich:

“Capitol Hill is buzzing today with major developments regarding our campaign for impeachment hearings for President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Just today, in what could be described as a perfect impeachment storm:

"After stating unequivocally that impeachment "is off the table," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated to CBS News today that the House Judiciary Committee should address the issues that Rep. Kucinich's has raised in his impeachment resolution.... This issue now reaches far beyond the substance of the Judiciary Committee's original inquiry regarding the firing of US Attorneys for political purposes. The crisis at hand relates to our most fundamental laws and of our Constitution. It is, in many ways, more serious than the Constitutional crisis surrounding Watergate."

Nancy Pelosi’s comments reflect the growing pressure of impeachment supporters on all elected officials and the heat from Cindy Sheehan’s courageous campaign to unseat her in the coming November elections. Cindy has made the impeachment of Bush, and Pelosi’s previous refusal to allow impeachment to proceed, a centerpiece of her campaign.

Congress may vote by Tuesday, July 15, on another impeachment resolution offered by Rep. Dennis Kucinich on July 10, 2008. This is a separate resolution from the 35-Articles of Impeachment that was introduced on June 9, 2008.

The new resolution is a single article of impeachment that accuses Bush of lying to Congress about Iraq’s so-called Weapons of Mass Destruction in order to obtain Congressional Authorization for the use of military force against Iraq. Congress passed the authorization in October 2002 and Bush then used it to launch an unprovoked war of aggression and subsequent occupation of Iraq.

[Dr. Shane]

Congressional approval rating now is 18%. That makes Bush's approval rating look high. If they want to impeach Bush I think the news media would love to put the presidential election on the back burner and watch the fight. We could end up with a Republican Congress and President by the time it is all over.

[carolaa]

Congressional approval rating now is 18%. That makes Bush's approval rating look high.

Is it that high? I thought I had read the other day that it was down to 9%. Hey, this might bring their approval rating back up.

[Dr. Shane]

The Congressional approval rating is the lowest it has ever been since records of it have been kept. The American public will see impeachment hearings as partisan bickering. The focus of the entire country will be taken off the election. It would never happen. It would be a disaster for the Democratic Party if it did.

[Bravus]

Have to admit it's too late. Best to just let Bush serve (I use the term loosely) out his last few months, and hope and pray he doesn't get you into Iran in that time. Given that Congress has seen fit to give a complete pass on the wiretapping issue I can't see them turning around and impeaching. The time to stop the lawlessness was years ago. Now it's just about cleaning up the mess - everyone already knows who made it.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

The time to stop the lawlessness was years ago.

Agreed! The time to stop it was long before Bush ever took office. If Democrats didn't like the warrantless wiretapping the time to have stopped it was with the Carter Administration or the Clinton Administration or they could have even objected when they were consulted about it by the Bush Administration. Most certainly the time to put a stop to it was years ago.

[Dr. Shane]

BTW: I agree the warrantless wiretapping is a violation of our Constitutional rights BUT... those rights only protect US citizens so information from warrantless wiretapping should be "poisonous fruit" that cannot be used against US citizens. However that same information should be able to be used in order to stop terrorist attacks or prosecute non-US citizens.

Yet, that said, many Presidents have done this so it is rather unfair to try and hold Bush's feet to the fire on it.

[there buster]

No, the warrantless wiretapping is not unconstitutional. IF it were of U.S. citizens in this country only for the purpose criminal prosecution, that would be one thing. Since it only involved conversations with foreign nationals in other countries, and was for the purpose of gather intelligence, it is and has always been constitutional.

If I call a friend in Dearborn, Michigan, wiretapping that conversation requires a warrant. If that friend calls his friend in Pakistan, then the gov't always has been empowered to listen in for intelligence gathering purposes.

History and legal precedent are quite clear on this.

The "spying on American citizens" talk is spin, or, if you prefer-- lies.

[fccool]

BTW: I agree the warrantless wiretapping is a violation of our Constitutional rights BUT... those rights only protect US citizens so information from warrantless wiretapping should be "poisonous fruit" that cannot be used against US citizens. However that same information should be able to be used in order to stop terrorist attacks or prosecute non-US citizens.

Yet, that said, many Presidents have done this so it is rather unfair to try and hold Bush's feet to the fire on it.

I guess, the question would be - are we really to derive our rights from a paper written 300 years ago, or are these something that we are born with as a human beings? In that respect... I don't really care if the government listens in on my conversations... as long as they STOP HIDING BEHIND THE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION AND "EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGES"! The issue with impeachment is not shifting the blame, but exactly that.... this government has been one of the least transparent governments yet. There's always something to hide, refusals to testify and etc. If the impeachment charges are ridiculous, then why withhold information from people?... e-mail records?... these people read our mail daily.

I think for ones it would be beneficial to get something other than "no comment" when difficult questions are asked.

[there buster]

Quote:

always something to hide, refusals to testify and etc.

were you concerned about this during the previous administration?

refusal to produce records? stealing classified documents (Sandy Burglar)? documents disappearing and reappearing?

[carolaa]

No, the warrantless wiretapping is not unconstitutional. IF it were of U.S. citizens in this country only for the purpose criminal prosecution, that would be one thing. Since it only involved conversations with foreign nationals in other countries, and was for the purpose of gather intelligence, it is and has always been constitutional.

I'm going by memory here, but I thought FISA allows the government to do wiretapping on anyone for up to a week without a warrant.

[there buster]

Quote:

I thought FISA allows the government to do wiretapping on anyone for up to a week without a warrant.

FISA

Foreign

Intelligence

Surveillance

Act

FISA is not about domestic crime, but Foreign Intelligence-- and FISA may in fact be an uncostitutional intrusion on Presidential power under article 2. Until the issue is taken to the Supreme Court, it will remain undetermined--and they might declare it non-justiciable.

[carolaa]

Excerpts from Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s remarks from yesterday’s press conference:

"Standing with me here today are representatives of organizations who have been part of a national grassroots impeachment movement which has collected over a million signatures. Nationally over two million people have signed impeachment petitions. I want to thank the leaders for their efforts and work with them to continue to build a movement for truth.

“9/11 is the day the world changed. We want today, September 10, 2008 to be a new beginning in our efforts to change the world. For my part, I am going to ask those grassroots leaders who have channeled their energies into defending the Constitution and the rule of law to join me in this new endeavor.”

Radhika Miller of ImpeachBush:

Good afternoon, my name is Radhika Miller. I am here representing ImpeachBush.org that was formed by former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark on January 18, 2003 from the stage of a rally of 500,000 people who were demonstrating on the National Mall just across the street to demand no war of aggression against Iraq. Today, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi have died and tens of thousands of US service members have been killed or badly wounded. These horrific casualties took place because George W. Bush was allowed and not punished for initiating a war of unprovoked aggression.

Since that time, more than one million people have voted at ImpeachBush.org in favor of impeachment. Volunteers from around the country collect these ImpeachBush petitions.

We want to thank Dennis Kucinich for having the courage and honesty to introduce 35 articles of impeachment in June of this year. Representative Kuncinch speaks for tens of millions of people who insist that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and all officials be held accountable for criminal misconduct, breaking the peace in an unprovoked war of aggression and for shredding the Constitution.

The fact that Bush has four months left in office does not matter one bit when it comes to violating the Constitution. As one speaker after another made clear in the July 25 hearing of the House Judiciary Committee hearing: impeachment is a constitutionally mandated duty and not a matter of partisan politics.

If Congress refuses to carry out its obligations it sends a message to all future presidents, from either Party, that the Constitution has been stripped of all meaning. We have a duty to act and we will.

(This was taken from ImpeachBush.org)