If a tree falls in the forest ...

National Impeachment Movement Ignored by Corporate Media
By Peter Phillips

If a national movement calling for the impeachment of the President is rapidly emerging and the corporate media are not covering it, is there really a national movement for the impeachment of the President?

Impeachment advocates are widely mobilizing in the U.S. Over 1,000 letters to the editors of major newspapers have been printed in the past six months asking for impeachment. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette letter writer George Matus says, “I am still enraged over unasked questions about exit polls, touch-screen voting, Iraq, the cost of the new Medicare…who formulated our energy policy, Jack Abramoff, the Downing Street Memos, and impeachment.” David Anderson in McMinnville, Oregon pens to the Oregonian, “Where are the members of our congressional delegation now in demanding the current president’s actions be investigated to see if impeachment or censure are appropriate actions?” William Dwyer’s letter in the Charleston Gazette says, “Congress will never have the courage to start the impeachment process without a groundswell of outrage from the people.”

City councils, boards of supervisors, and local and state level Democrat central committees have voted for impeachment. Arcata, California voted for impeachment on January 6. The City and County of San Francisco, voted Yes on February 28. The Sonoma County Democrat Central Committee (CA) voted for Impeachment on March 16. The townships of Newfane, Brookfield, Dummerston, Marlboro and Putney in Vermont all voted for impeachment the first week of March. The New Mexico State Democrat party convention rallied on March 18 for the ”impeachment of George Bush and his lawful removal from office.” The national Green Party called for impeachment on January 3. Op-ed writers at the St. Petersburg Times, Newsday, Yale Daily News, Barrons, Detroit Free Press, and the Boston Globe have called for impeachment. The San Francisco Bay Guardian (1/25/06) The Nation (1/30/06) and Harpers (3/06) published cover articles calling for impeachment. As of March 16, thirty-two US House of Representatives have signed on as co-sponsors to House Resolution 635, which would create a Select Committee to look into the grounds for recommending President Bush’s impeachment.

... the rest after the jump.

Requium for the last REAL conservative

Bill Buckley's Conservatism
by Jacob Heilbrunn



With the death of William F. Buckley, Jr., conservatives have been eulogizing him as a pivotal figure in the history of their movement. President Bush declared, "His legacy lives on in the ideas he championed and in the magazine he founded -- National Review."

Not exactly. As Buckley headed into his final years, he became vehemently opposed to the crusading, neoconservative stance that the younger generation at National Review adopted in championing the Iraq War. Indeed, both Buckleys, William F. and his brilliantly talented son Christopher, became acidulous critics of President Bush and vice-president Dick Cheney. The elder Buckley declared that if Bush were serving in a parliamentary democracy, he would have to resign, if not impeached. And Christopher, writing recently in the Washington Monthly, noted that he hopes the GOP loses in 2008: "Who knew, in 2000, that "compassionate conservatism" meant bigger government, unrestricted government spending, government intrusion in personal matters, government ineptitude, and cronyism in disaster relief?"

The rest after the click ...

My comment:

Bill Buckley passes; a Conservative intellectual departs the field leaving no heirs. I'm sorry to see him go. It can now be said that what passes for Conservatism in the United States has truly and totally lost it's mind.

Getting away with it ...

or watch the video here ...

Bush Budget Adds to Military, Cuts Prevention

Miriam Pemberton and Anita Dancs / Foreign Policy Focus

Voters--Republicans and Democrats alike--are telling pollsters they want, not a modest course correction, not a turned page, but a whole new book. The security budget President Bush proposed today is anything but.

Every year since 2004, according to analysis by the Task Force on a Unified Security Budget for the United States, published by the Institute for Policy Studies, nearly 90% of security spending, excluding the supplemental appropriations for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, has been devoted to achieving security by military force. Spending on prevention tools, including diplomacy, nonproliferation, foreign aid, contributions to international organizations and homeland security put together accounts for only 10% of the security budget. This year is no exception.

This year military spending even excluding expenditures on the wars we are actually fighting will be higher than at any time since World War II. It will exceed the military spending of all other nations combined. If President George W. Bush gets the budget he has requested, we will spend in the 2009 fiscal year 18 times the money engaging the rest of the world through the military as by any other means.

Read the rest after the click ...

War Card / Score Card - the Drumbeat of Lies

President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.

On at least 532 separate occasions (in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony, and the like), Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda, or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration's case for war.

It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to Al Qaeda. This was the conclusion of numerous bipartisan government investigations, including those by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (2004 and 2006), the 9/11 Commission, and the multinational Iraq Survey Group, whose "Duelfer Report" established that Saddam Hussein had terminated Iraq's nuclear program in 1991 and made little effort to restart it.

More after the click ...

My Comment:

All highly documented including a month by month graph showing the number of official public statements of untruths in the run-up to war. In my opinion, worth reading.

To those on the right who do lip service to the idea of "personal responsibility" I would say that "responsibility" and "accountability" are two aspects of the same idea as in: You are responsible therefore you must be accountable. Given the magnitude of the consequences of a war that has cost us all so greatly (in lives, in resources, in international prestige and credibility), why the reluctance to hold accountable the people responsible for those costs to those who are paying the price? Is that mantra of "responsibility" merely a talking point to be rolled out when its convenient like attacking "welfare queen" straw men?

Where is all that moral indignation that was expressed at such a deafening volume when a Democratic president lied to congress about a personal incident? Someone please explain to me why that lie and its national and international implications was so much worse, so much more damaging than these lies and their consequences.


Priorities keep on keepin' on.

Wexler calls for hearings

Last night, Congressman Wexler took the House floor, calling for hearings on Rep. Kucinich's Articles of Impeachment for Vice President Dick Cheney.


or watch the video here ...

Bush sums it all up in seven seconds

"In the seven years that I've been the President we've had a recession, corporate scandals, the 9-11 attack, major national disasters... uhhh... two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq--all that created was uncertainty."

-- Bush from the Rose Garden, today.

My comment: Well, now, that's quite a list of accomplishments. But you missed a few. We've also had Alberto-gate, Torture-gate, Wiretap-gate, E-mail-gate, and a bunch of other stellar moments.

Is it too late to add "Impeachment" to the list?

Given a history that includes the inability to find oil in Texas and a National Guard career capped with an A.W.O.L. it would make for an absolutely unrivaled perfect record!

King George XLIII

King George XLIII in George III's clothing.

by Dan DeWalt

To date, the most persuasive and productive arguments for impeachment have been based upon the Constitution, which is suffering most egregiously under this administration and Congress, and which expressly prescribes the remedy to be taken should these circumstances arise. And while these arguments are making headway in the halls of Congress, where impeachment must happen, the politicians who are supposed to represent us do not yet understand the depth and breadth of our disgust and dismay with their dereliction of duty. While a growing number have joined the call for impeachment, far too many are towing the identical Republican/Democratic party line of ignoring the Bush/Cheney administration's repeated constitutional violations.

When we last faced a King George who labored to: "subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution" by: "depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury: For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses," when we last found that "our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury", we knew what conclusion to draw: "A prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant is unfit to be the ruler of a free people." These of course are quotes from the Declaration of Independence. And when this document was solemnly signed and made public, it had no legal standing whatsoever. It had no chance of succeeding against the world's greatest empire. It alienated the colonists still friendly to England. It drew a line that clearly demarcated the divide that already existed in colonial society. Those who signed it were branded as radicals and, in fact, made outlaws by virtue of their signatures.

The rest after the click ...

That didn't take long!

Yesterday Rep Wexler asking for citizens to sign the petition on his website in support of impeachment hearings for Vice President, Dick Cheney. Wexler was hoping to get 50,000 signatures and it didn’t take long — it took just 24 hours to meet his goal and the signatures are still rolling in. If you haven’t signed the petition yet, you can find it here.

Wexler Wants Hearings - so do I

... or get the video here.

My comment: I signed the petition on Wexler's web site because I believe We, the People, need to know the full truth. If Clinton lying to Congress about a personal peccadillo constituted sufficient reason to invoke impeachment hearings then the manipulation of intelligence to bring this country into war resulting in the deaths of literally thousands of American troops as well as perhaps hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, the "outing" of a covert intelligence agent for political purposes, and engaging in the same torture that is outlawed by international agreements for which we have held others accountable as well as a laundry list of other allegations require - even DEMAND - scrutiny.

I don't suggest I support the proceedings as a pay-back for the Clinton fiasco but, if that is where the bar has been set, then the current administration is way over the top. Even if we don't apply those proceedings as precedent, it appears there is sufficient evidence of the breach of black letter law ... and, in a nation of law, no one is above the law ... even in time of war. We have held others accountable for war crimes and for lying to Congress in the past. We cannot make exceptions now.

Yes, I signed the petition on Wexler's web site. I hope, in the quest for honest answers and a full airing of the facts, you will, too. I believe that, if you have questions about how this administration has conducted itself on behalf of the people of this country, you have a patriotic duty to seek answers by means of the mechanisms afforded us, the people, in the Constitution. Impeachment is serious business ... so is war and so is undermining our intelligence organizations and so are breaches of international treaties and so is lying to Congress and to the American people.

A Question of Impeachment

Democrats took it off the table ...

... so ... the Culture Project it on the stage ...

Catch up on the arguments for impeachment with the Culture Project.

Culture Project brings crucial and timely concerns to the fore once again with a new, unique series that gathers some of the most brilliant and visionary minds of our time to explore and debate the case for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

You may not agree that there's a legitimate case for impeachment, but in a free and open society, when so many knowledgeable, well educated people who care about the future of the country think there is a case ... perhaps we owe it to ourselves to at least hear them out before we fully close out minds to the possibility.

We should at the very least measure the merits of their case on the scale of the case made against William Jefferson Clinton.


... or see one segment of the full presentation here.

Former Aide Blames Bush for Leak Deceit

WASHINGTON (AP) --

Former White House press secretary Scott McClellan blames President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for efforts to mislead the public about the role of White House aides in leaking the identity of a CIA operative.

In an excerpt from his forthcoming book, McClellan recounts the 2003 news conference in which he told reporters that aides Karl Rove and I. Lewis ''Scooter'' Libby were ''not involved'' in the leak involving operative Valerie Plame.

''There was one problem. It was not true,'' McClellan writes, according to a brief excerpt released Tuesday. ''I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest-ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice president, the president's chief of staff and the president himself.''

More in the New York Times after the click ...

My Comment: You really have to ask yourself,

after herding American into a needless war with lies about weapons of mass destruction and Saddam's connection to al Qaeda;

after violating the Constitution by arbitrarily detaining Americans, legal residents, and non-Americans, without due process, without charge, and without access to counsel;

after violating U.S. law and the Constitution through widespread wiretapping of the phone calls and emails of Americans without a warrant;

after 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;

and now the light of day shines on the outing of an undercover agent of this country's intelligence service, not only jeopardizing that person's life but also a.) jeopardizing any foreign nationals who might have worked with her, b.) jeopardizing any other American intelligence agents who might have been seen in contact with her in a foreign country c.) compromising ongoing covert intelligence operations specifically related to Iran's nuclear program -- which, by the laws of this country constitute treason ...

WTF else has to happen before it is universally recognized that these people MUST be impeached?

If lying to Congress about an extra-marital affair constitutes sufficient "crimes and misdemeanors" to impeach a president, you can't tell me that lying to congress about the reasons for war, the subversion of the Constitution they're sworn to uphold and defend and the sabotaging of ongoing intelligence operations being conducted on behalf of this country don't reach that standard!

There are those who contend that Plame was merely a secretary who's greatest responsibility was to fetch coffee in the CIA's DC area offices, but if the CIA is any good at all in providing covers for its covert agents ... how the hell would those people know?

Review the sequence of events here on FactCheck.org.

"If I Get 10,000 Handwritten Letters, I'll Put Impeachment Back on the Table" - Nancy Pelosi

Don't send your handwritten letters to Pelosi's office, send them to Cindy Sheehan's office; she'll keep a GENUINE tally. Here's a note from Sheehan:

Tell Nancy to Impeach Dick Cheney
November 12, 2007

House Resolution 333 for the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney is off the House floor, and has instead been sent to the Judiciary Committee for "further study." This maneuver, organized by Pelosi and the Democratic leadership, is consistent with their mantra that impeachment is "off the table." But, we are told Nancy Pelosi is reported to have replied to the question of impeachment that if she received 10,000 hand written letters she would proceed with it. What are we waiting for?

Cindy Sheehan wrote this:

Dear Friends

Instead of sending your impeachment letters for Dick Cheney to Nancy Pelosi's office, send them to my office so we can get an official count.

Please send them to:
Cindy for Congress
RE: Impeach Dick Cheney
1260 Mission Blvd
San Francisco, Ca 94103

Please pass this around and have them sent by Friday, November 16th and we will have them delivered to her office in San Francisco before Thanksgiving.

Love
Cindy

My comment: Thanks, Trudy.

An Impeachment Petition

Ten Reasons to Impeach George Bush and Dick Cheney

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.

---

Find it here. Pick a reason. Any one of them would do it under normal circumstances. Just ask yourself what would happen to Bill Clinton if ANY of these charges could legitimately be leveled against HIM.

Religion Briefs: Coalition of nuns calls for impeaching Bush and Cheney

JOURNAL WIRE REPORT



A progressive group of U.S. nuns has called on Congress to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney because of their roles in the war in Iraq.

“The National Coalition of American Nuns is impelled by conscience to call you to act promptly to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for ... high crimes and misdemeanors,” the group wrote in a letter written on behalf of its board members.

The letter says that impeachment is warranted for their “deceiving the public under the false pretense that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction” and “destroying” the reputation of the United States and the good will of other nations.

“The time for impeachment is now — before the example of George W. Bush’s regime is set in stone,” they wrote. “Future generations will thank you for preserving the freedom of our nation and its relation to the entire human community.”

The coalition was founded in 1969 for individual nuns dedicated to issues of social justice and human rights.

Here ...

The Case for Impeachment

Bill Moyers talks with Bruce Fein and John Nichols

BILL MOYERS: One of the fellows you're about to meet wrote the first article of impeachment against President Clinton. Bruce Fein did so because perjury is a legal crime. And Fein believed no one is above the law. A constitutional scholar, Bruce Fein served in the Justice Department during the Reagan administration and as general counsel of the Federal Communications Commission. Bruce Fein has been affiliated with conservative think tanks such as the American Enterprise Institute and the Heritage Foundation and now writes a weekly column for THE WASHINGTON TIMES and Politico.com.

He's joined by John Nichols, the Washington correspondent for THE NATION and an associate editor of the CAPITOL TIMES. Among his many books is this most recent one, THE GENIUS OF IMPEACHMENT: THE FOUNDERS' CURE FOR ROYALISM. Good to see you both. Bruce, you wrote that article of impeachment against Bill Clinton. Why did you think he should be impeached?

The full transcript is here.

Impeachment is NOT a Constitutional Crisis

... its the remedy for one.

Round Table Discussion

Vermont Votes to Impeach Bush/Cheney

John Nichols
Wed Mar 7, 7:36 AM ET

The Nation -- When Vermont Governor Jim Douglas, a Republican with reasonably close ties to President Bush, asked if there was any additional business to be considered at the town meeting he was running in Middlebury, Ellen McKay popped up and proposed the impeachment of Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

Full Article Here

Cindy Sheehan STILL thinks it's a good idea.

Edit and Update!!

BOSTON (Reuters) - More than 30 Vermont towns passed resolutions on Tuesday seeking to impeach President Bush, while at least 16 towns in the tiny New England state called on Washington to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq.

Full Article Here