June 17, 2007 at 14:28:44

The duty of Christians to impeach Bush and Cheney

by Carol Wolman   
From OpEd News


Christians have a duty to denounce Bush for his crimes, and see that he and Cheney are impeached.
A recent news story says "Southern Baptists split over politics". They are arguing about whether or not to be involved in the political process. How hypocritical!
Christians, especially evangelicals, helped put Bush into power. They believed Pat Robertson, who "anointed" him to lead America. They thought he would bring about God's kingdom on earth.
Now they don't like what he has done, so they want to retreat from politics. Sour grapes.

Luke 6:44 " For each tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they pick grapes from a briar bush.
The evangelical Christians who helped put Bush in power are accessories to his many crimes. They should confess their error and repent.
The "fruit" of Bush's presidency is poisonous. Two illegal invasions and occupations, based on lies. Massive transfers of wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich, including Bush and Cheney. Corruption, incompetence, sex and money scandals galore- a briar bush indeed for those who put their hopes in a "Christian" president.
Bush has broken many international treaties, which are the supreme law of the land- the Geneva conventions, the Nuremberg principles, laws against napalm and cluster bombs, etc.
And shredded the US Constitution, which says that "We the People" are sovereign, the source of authority, and the president is a public servant. Bush seeks to restore the monarchy cast off during the American Revolution.
Bush has overruled laws passed by Congress with his signing statements, broken the wiretapping laws, subverted the judicial process.
What is happening here is described in 2Thess 2: 3-12:
3Let no one in any way deceive you, for it (the Kingdom of God) will not come unless the apostasy (Bush's presidency) comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,
4who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.
5Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things?
6And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed.
7For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.
8Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming;

---

From The Huffington Post:

Impeachment is the Necessary Next Step for Gonzales

      
Last week, Common Cause called on the House Judiciary Committee to start impeachment proceedings against Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for demonstrating reckless disregard for the obligations of his office.

That cannot happen fast enough.

Each day seems to bring new revelations that further darken the cloud over Gonzales and his Justice Department, including that the Justice Department is investigating whether Gonzales sought to improperly influence the congressional testimony of his former aide, Monica Goodling, who acknowledged that she had "crossed the line," when she used political criteria in the selection of non-political positions within the Justice Department. The Los Angeles Times reports that the fallout can now be felt in federal courtrooms, where defense lawyers are raising questions about the motives of government lawyers prosecuting their clients.

What we know so far about the firings of the nine US attorneys and the fallout is a result of the hard work of the House Judiciary Committee and its determined efforts to expose the truth through congressional hearings.

But the committee needs to take the next step.

To date, the president and Attorney General Gonzales have refused to allow senior officials to testify under oath about any role they may have played in the firings or to provide important documentation on the issue.

The congressional impeachment process is specifically designed to protect the public from misfeasance by public officials. Given the stonewalling and recalcitrance of the administration over the attorney general's conduct, impeachment appears to be the only vehicle for vindicating the public's interest in having an attorney general who is free of conflicts of interest and who enforces the nation's laws in a fair and nonpartisan manner.

This episode is a blow to the integrity and credibility of our criminal justice system. And it comes at a time of corrosive public cynicism and distrust of government that has been fueled by recent political scandals. A failure to investigate and disclose to the American people will only exacerbate those feelings.

Our attorney general and our U.S. Attorneys have a long history of non-partisanship and of enforcing the nation's laws in a fair manner. That reputation has been tarnished and must be restored. Only through impeachment proceedings will the American public know the full truth about the role that the attorney general and the White House played in this episode.

---

Impeachment FAQ
Monday, 18 June 2007, 1:54 pm
Column: David Swanson
Impeachment FAQ

From The Impeachment FAQ:

Frequently Asked Questions About Impeachment-

Why would we want a President Cheney? Or why would we want a new Republican who could run as an incumbent? Or why would we want a President Pelosi?
We propose impeaching Cheney first or together with Bush. The first Articles of Impeachment to be introduced (H Res 333) are addressed only to Cheney. Impeaching Cheney first ought to put the fear of a President Cheney to rest. But there remains the possibility of fearing his replacement or even of not wanting Nancy Pelosi to be president or not wanting her to become president in this way. She won't. We will never succeed in removing Bush and Cheney from office simultaneously and by surprise. We will remove them, but they will be replaced by a new President Ford, who will operate within the rule of law and lose the next election.

But this whole discussion misses the point. The question of who holds which office for the next year or six months, as well as the question of who wins the next election, is of very minor importance in comparison with the question of whether future administrations will be compelled to operate within the limitations of the law. If we do not impeach Cheney and Bush, we will establish that it is permitted for future presidents and vice presidents to mislead the Congress and the public into wars, spy in violation of the law, detain without charge, torture, operate in secrecy, and rewrite laws with signing statements. Those powers in the wrong hands could do far more serious damage than Bush and Cheney have done.

So, if we keep this in perspective, the fear of Cheney appears trivial. It appears even more so when we consider that impeachment and removal from office are two separate steps and that we're only working on the first one so far, and when we recognize the extent to which Cheney has been running the country already for years. Were Cheney officially president, most policies would remain unchanged, but the public face of the White House and of the Republican party would be that of a man whose approval rating has been unable to top 20 percent. The Republicans will never allow this, so it would be rather foolish for the Democrats to retreat out of fear of it. ...