BS: A Declaration of Impeachment

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jul 06 - 10:39 PM

Looks like it is from this guy....


A

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jul 06 - 10:51 PM

From http://www.consortiumnews,com, excerpted:

Review of 'The One Percent Doctrine'
By Peter Dale Scott
July 27, 2006

The One Percent Doctrine is an important book. On a factual level, it is a hard-edged narrative of the conflict between DCI George Tenet's CIA, representing what author Ron Suskind calls "the old world of evidence," and Vice-President Dick Cheney and the Pentagon, the proponents of "a new day of action."

But Suskind is writing on behalf of those at State and CIA -- plus "a host of generals at Defense" -- whose conclusion is that the systematic ignoring of "the basics of analytical due diligence" presents "institutional dangers for the government and for the country" (328).

The book's title derives from a remark by Cheney at a White House meeting in November 2001, that even a "one percent chance" that al Qaeda might acquire a nuclear weapon demanded, not analysis, but response. In Suskind's gloss:

"Justified or not, fact-based or not, 'our response' is what matters. As to 'evidence,' the bar was set so low that the word itself almost didn't apply. If there was even a one percent chance of terrorists getting a weapon of mass destruction…the United States must now act as if it were a certainty. This was a mandate of extraordinary breadth." (62)

Cheney's "one percent doctrine"marginalized the CIA, whose inconvenient facts (there was no al Qaeda-Iraq connection, Saddam was not purchasing uranium ore in Niger) were seen as obstructive; and marked the agency as a target for White House displeasure and ultimately retribution.

The book can be construed as a well-argued case for impeachment of the Vice-President, and possibly also of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Both men are accused of misdirecting the country and even at times of frustrating the clearly expressed will of President Bush, who in this book emerges as far closer to Tenet than many of us had believed. Condoleezza Rice is criticized chiefly for her failure as National Security Adviser to establish a robust process of policy coordination, leaving Cheney and Rumsfeld to prevail.   (...)

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 06 - 02:13 AM

Wanta was sentenced to 22 years in prison. (Better he had killed a few people than that he owed taxes.) Afterward, on Sept. 21, 1996, Wanta wrote a mysterious letter to Hillary Rodham Clinton, referring to "U.S. President Bill Clinton's Short Term Notes and IMF Sale of Bullion." In the letter Wanta referred to his own "de-stabilization of the Soviet Union Rubles (SUR)" and noted that he "prevented the Soviet & Italian Mafiosa from the Soviet Funds in favour of our U.S. Treasury & Metals Accounts in excess of US$ 150 billion".

Wanta then threatened: "Until by legal release from the un-consitutional/ false incarceration in Wisconsin--as a diplomat & non-resident--I am legally interested in the corporate placement of short-term notes & I.M.F. gold bullion/troy ounce delivery contract. Thank you for your kind assistance in this timely situation."

Wanta's letter (or letters) got results. On Jan. 10, 1997, Wanta received a reply from Erskine Bowles at the White House.

                         Mr. Leo E. Wanta
                         c/o Kettle Moraine
                         Correctional Institute
                         P.O. Box 31
                         Plymouth, WI 53073

                         Dear Mr. Wanta:

                         Thank you for your
                         letter. I appreciate
                         hearing from you.

                         To give your concerns the
                         proper attention, I have
                         forwarded your letter to
                         the Office of Agency
                         Liaison within the White
                         House. You can be certain
                         that your concerns will
                         be carefully reviewed.

                         Again, thank you for
                         writing.

                         Sincerely,

                         Erskine B. Bowles

On February 1, 1997, after Bowles had checked with W.H. Agency Relations, Leo Wanta was released on $90,000 bail.

So here's what we know about Wanta so far: Extradited from Switzerland on a triviality. Sentenced to 22 years on the same triviality. But then sprung after references to "Bill Clinton's short-term notes" and the White House checks with Agency Liaison.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 28 Jul 06 - 11:47 AM

"Can you name the one country on earth where the government can steal elections, strip away basic rights, spy on citizens, and launch wars based on lies, but where the people do not take over the nation's capital in protest?

If you said the United States, you'll be wrong on September fifth when Camp Democracy begins on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.   
http://www.campdemocracy.org

At long last, Americans are preparing to say "Enough is enough," and to do what Ukrainians, Mexicans, or any other people not drugged into acquiescence would do when things got this bad: occupy the capital city to demand peace, justice, and accountability.

The goal of the many organizations and individuals working to prepare for Camp Democracy is to provide a space for everyone who is fed up with lies and criminality to come and demand change. In fact, at the suggestion of Cindy Sheehan who will come to Camp Democracy following Camp Casey (Aug. 16 – Sept. 2 in Crawford, Texas), we're calling it Camp Democracy at Fort Fed Up. Our demands will not be for anarchy or disorder, but for a restoration of the rule of law. This is a tough-on-crime movement. We just have a different notion of who the criminals are. And when we get tough, we use nonviolence.
...

This morning I was a guest lecturer at a college course on modern history. We spent two hours discussing impeachment, impeachable offenses, and where the Bush Administration's actions fit in history. This is where I think they fit: as a significant threat to end the oldest democracy on the planet. Never before has an American president offered anything close to this wide-ranging assault on the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the powers of the legislative and judicial branches of government.

Here's a sampling:

* Illegal spying in violation of FISA and the Fourth Amendment, openly confessed to, openly promoted in signing statements, known to involve phone calls, phone records, internet use, bank records, and observation of legal nonviolent activities.
* Illegal detentions in violation of the Fourth Amendment, International law, U.S. Law, and a recent Supreme Court ruling.
* Rounding up of thousands of citizens and legal residents for detention or deportation.
* Torture, maintenance of secret camps, and extraordinary rendition, in violation of the Fourth Amendment, International Law, US Law, and openly promoted in signing statement and administration policy papers.
* Illegal war – launched illegally under international law, launched in violation of the U.S. Constitution which requires that the Congress declare war, and launched on the basis of feloniously misleading Congress and the American public.
* Use of a variety of illegal weapons.
* Illegal targeting of civilians, journalists, and hospitals.
* Illegal seizure of another nation's resources.
* Illegal use of funds in Iraq that had been appropriated for Afghanistan.
* Leaking of classified information in order to mislead the Congress and the public, and in order to punish truth tellers.
* Leaking of identity of an undercover agent.
* Retribution against whistleblowers.
* Use of signing statements to reverse 750 laws passed by Congress.
* Production of phony news reports at home and abroad.
* Dereliction of duty in neglecting global warming, hurricanes, hunger, AIDS, and warnings of 9-11 attacks.
* Facilitating Israel's attacks on Lebanon.
* Obstruction of investigations by Congress, the 9-11 Commission, and Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald.
* Stealing elections.

When is it enough? When does it become clear that history will view us as those who let it all go to waste, as those who sat by as they came for the Muslims and then they came for the immigrants and then they came for the next group on the list, as those who saw the nation sliding into fascism and let it slide… or as those who rose up and resisted and restored what was most worth saving in a system of government based on the rule of law?
...
(From www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/3904/1/200/

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 28 Jul 06 - 11:50 AM

These days, Peaches hot on the impeachment trail
By Tom Lanham, CONTRIBUTOR



IT WASN'T the usual after-hours party invite she regularly receives in her adopted hometown of Berlin. But techno-punk diva Peaches, intrigued, decided to RSVP anyway. Which is how she wound up onstage at New York's Hammerstein Ballroom on March 20, appearing alongside Michael Stipe, Rufus Wainwright, Margaret Cho, Susan Sarandon and Cindy Sheehan in "Bring'Em Home Now!" a Veterans for Peace benefit concert opposing the war in Iraq. And she prepared something very special for the occasion.
Peaches — once a mild-mannered Toronto music teacher named Merrill Nisker — likens the jaw-dropping response to her "Bring 'Em Home" performance to the gasps Stephen Colbert recently received during his unexpected skewering of President Bush.

The song she'd penned was stamped with her typically ribald wit. Titled "F— or Kill," it objects to soldiers' overseas deployment and ends with her snarling over and over again, "Impeach Bush."

Steve Earle had opened the show with a protest ditty. "And he was so heartwarming," recalls Peaches, who hastily added "F— or Kill" as the opening track of her then-nearly-completed third album, dubbed "Impeach My Bush."

"But that style folks were already used to, in a good way. So I think my message really came through, because no one expected to hear that from me. And no one had ever heard that from me before. But sex is really just a natural, important thing in our lives, and when someone like Bush refuses to fund groups because they use condoms to educate people instead of telling them to abstain from sex, well, that's a person who is helping to spread AIDS."


.........

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Jul 06 - 08:41 AM

Amos. The cut and paste wonder of the world.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 11:25 AM

Impeach Bush

It has been proven that President Bush has lied to Congress, the American people and the leaders of the world. He has made this country and the world more dangerous, not safer.

He continually subverts the Constitution to achieve his goals and then has the audacity to say he supports the spread of democracy, while he slowly takes away our rights and freedoms here in the U.S.

He believes he is above the law, and his Republican friends in Congress seem to agree. There has never been a more solid case for impeachment in the history of this country.

Joseph Jisa, Lincoln

(From the Lincoln, Nebraska, Journal STar)

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: GUEST,Frank Hamilton
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 12:33 PM

It's absurd how Bill Clinton's sexual encounter gets the blame for a failed GOP foreign policy.

Lying about an illicit sexual affair is considered more important than the lies told to American citizens to trick us into murderous agression in Iraq.

Strange priorities here.

Impeachment can't be accomplished with a GOP congress.

I don't know if the Dems get in that it will be accomplished.

I believe it's up to the World Court and the UN to censure the Bush mishandling of the Iraqi occupation.

In the meantime, Hezbollah becomes more powerful and the Taliban grows strong again. Israel overreacts throwing the balance off even more.

Impeachment requires a fair-minded and impartial political governing body which we just don't have.

Wish it would work.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 01:40 PM

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/spsy.jpg


I hear you, Frank.


A

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: katlaughing
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 05:28 PM

Again, thanks, Amos, for the links, etc., esp. the last one. Have printed it out and plan to put it on my car.

Guest, cite your sources for the Wanta scenario.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 07:16 PM

"...Such self-serving hyperbole is now under serious assault, and Franks and his bosses, Donald Rumsfeld and George W. Bush, are being exposed as the military failures and strategic frauds they truly are.

In his new book, "Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq," Thomas E. Ricks, the Washington Post's senior Pentagon correspondent, presents a detailed account of the failure to properly prepare for the war in Iraq and the nearly total absence of any thought about what might happened after Saddam Hussein's government collapsed.

Ricks' book is a scorching indictment of the political and military leaders responsible for the mess in Iraq and blows away Gen. Franks' glowing self-assessment.

Ricks does not mince words: "It now seems more likely that history's judgment will be that the U.S. invasion of Iraq in the spring of 2003 was based on perhaps the worst war plan in American history."

Thomas Ricks is neither an ideologue nor a smug Monday-morning quarterback. He's certainly not a Bush-basher nor a liberal peacenik. He's been covering the Pentagon -- first for the Wall Street Journal and now the Post -- for 23 years. He has a deep and abiding respect for the military.

His criticism -- richly researched and comprehensive -- is an important contribution to our understanding of just how thoroughly incompetent Bush, Rumsfeld and their sycophants in uniform truly are. It's stunning. They knew the United States would prevail militarily, but what to do following "mission accomplished" in Iraq was a mere afterthought.

Ricks lays it out in his very first paragraph: "President Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003 ultimately may come to be seen as one of the most profligate actions in the history of American foreign policy. The consequences of his choice won't be clear for decades, but it is already abundantly apparent in mid-2006 that the U.S. government went to war in Iraq with scant solid international support and on the basis of incorrect information -- about weapons of mass destruction and a supposed nexus between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda's terrorism -- and then occupied the country negligently. Thousands of U.S. troops and an untold number of Iraqis have died. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent, many of them squandered. Democracy may yet come to Iraq and the region, but so too may civil war or a regional conflagration, which in turn could lead to spiraling oil prices and a global economic shock."

That paragraph should be memorized and some brave member of Congress ought to include it in articles of impeachment. Ricks proceeds to describe the failure to plan the occupation and the inability of Rumsfeld and his equally incompetent minions to understand how to deal with the insurgency.

In fact, Ricks makes the case that many tactics in the American military operation in Iraq actually fueled more violence. U.S. troops broke into homes, rounding up tens of thousands of civilians, most of whom were innocent. They used indiscriminate artillery fire on the insurgents, killing and wounding more civilians, used promiscuous violence at checkpoints, enraging local populations and, in effect, helping insurgent recruitment."

---

http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/gallagher274.html

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 07:23 PM

Why, they're even talking impeachment down in Huntsville, Alabama, not to mention Newfane, Vermont.


A

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 07:25 PM

History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure."

— the late Justice Thurgood Marshall, 1989

Are we to understand that the legislative solution to the constitutional crisis precipitated by Bush II is to sue the administration?

Senators proposed reviewing signing statements that President Bush attaches to legislation signed into law. Congress could have the right to sue.

Remember Sen. John McCain's anti-torture amendment introduced to have the Army Field Manual upheld and prevent "cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment" of anyone in U.S. custody?

Bush signed it, then dissented in a signing statement. This is like crossing one's fingers, claiming to be truthful. Those little white lies add up.

Bush's sole veto was for stem cells. However, he has issued more than 750 signing statements affecting labor, immigration, civil rights, the armed forces, environment and whistleblower protections. (Watch the Voting Rights Act extension!)

Some in Congress think his excessive signing statements are a deliberate attempt by the executive to negate the legislature. That's unconstitutional.

Finally, the nonpartisan American Bar Association is analyzing the legality of this contradictory practice. Congress follows the ABA's lead.

If these signing statements are to be considered a breach of contract with Congress, then that leads to the courts and litigation.

If Congress proceeds with the breached-contract approach, however, it needn't tally individual bills when the worst breach involves the Constitution which the president swore to uphold.

Constitutional remedies to an errant executive are censure and impeachment. But our spayed and neutered Congress has more bark than bite.

That said, senators proposed legislation to "authorize the Congress to undertake judicial review of those signing statements with the view to having the president's acts declared unconstitutional."

Senators are building a case for the executive's obvious contempt for the legislature.

Indeed, the White House wants Congress to adopt the Roman dictum Inter arma silent leges ("In time of war, the laws are silent."). That is a dangerous proposition that Congress must reject but to which Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is dedicated.

• Last week, Justice Department and intelligence officials asked Congress to approve new laws allowing the government to continue the warrantless domestic spying. Lawmakers earlier objected to Bush deliberately circumventing the post-Nixon FISA court. Not long ago, Gonzales testified — though not under oath — that Congress gave its implied consent and that Bush acted within the Constitution as commander in chief. This argument is legally flawed.

• The White House wants Congress to strike down a 1978 law governing surveillance. Again the apparatchiks seek approval after they've done something wrong. Congress mustn't become complicit in Bush II's fear-mongering and extrajudicial antics.

• Despite a recent Supreme Court rebuke, the Bushvolk since produced a plan to prosecute detainees through military tribunals similar to those deemed unlawful by the high court. They've circumvented FISA, and now they want to bypass the high court. Not until State, Justice and Defense department officials colluded were military lawyers consulted last week. Military lawyers objected rightly to being left out of the loop.

• Gonzales approached Congress last week to nullify the War Crimes Act approved about decade ago which upheld the Geneva Conventions and criminalizes torture. The Bushvolk asked Congress for a shield to further violate human rights and tarnish the military.

There is but one shield, and we, the people, have it: the Constitution.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: katlaughing
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 07:50 PM

Apologies if this has already been posted: Do-it-yourself-impeachment

(Sorry for the incorrect link. Now fixed.)

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 09:02 PM

Kat:

Check that link? It seems to go to an Irish Freedom Fighter's Blog...

A

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: katlaughing
Date: 30 Jul 06 - 10:06 PM

Thanks, Amos. That was from a post about a poet's song. Link is now correct.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: DougR
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 01:27 PM

Larry K.: Amos loves to have threads for his very own, didn't you know?
What is the poor lad to do when the Republicans continue to hold majorities in both the House and the Senate in November? Sad, sad. As an aside, the last photo I saw of the senior member of the Supreme Court pictured him as looking pretty frail. Bush may have a shot at nominating another Conservative to the Court before his term is up. If that happens, watch out Canada, you are going to be invaded by Mudcatters!

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 06:00 PM

Your folly, as usual, good DougR, is that you don't notice the actual source of the posts involved; I am merely providing pointers to a large field of angry unrest which is beginning to show itself across the breadth of the nation. I have written only a few of these posts originally, myself -- I am mostly just reporting the views that others have written, to whom I (almost) always include attribution.

You keep some very strange bedfellows, I will say that for you.


A

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: katlaughing
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 06:55 PM

Dream on, DougR.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 10:12 PM

Said Amos smiling down from Mount Olympus:

It's for your own good.

Oh look at the womenfolk frollicking in the sunlight in various stages of dishabille. Loyal subjects all.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 11:37 PM

Old Guy, you sound like you have just come out from under anesthesia, or sedation, or smoking some strange stuff.

Try this on for size: CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING.


A

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 11:41 PM

Then you need some of it.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 11:46 PM

July 31, 2006 at 13:27:47
Time for California to Impeach Bush and Cheney


by David Swanson


http://www.opednews.com

Next week marks a pivotal moment for the California Impeachment Resolution (AJR39). Advocates will be lobbying legislators in the California Assembly and holding a press conference on Tuesday August 8th at 9:30 am with Assembly member Paul Koretz (author of AJR39) and various other legislators, advocates and celebrities. At the press conference, we hope to present thousands of names on a petition to the California legislature.

Please sign the online petition in support of California Assemblyman Paul Koretz' Assembly Joint Resolution, AJR39, to call for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

We hope to reach at least 1,500 signatures by Friday of this week. With your help, I think we can do it.

You must reside in California to sign the petition. Go to:
http://www.gopetition.com/online/8849.html

For further information, please contact Susie Shannon at [phone] or e-mail [e-mail]

Thank You.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 11:50 PM

Rep. Conyers Preparing Articles of Impeachment
July 31, 2006 05:21 PM EST


By Sher Zieve – Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) is said to believe that the Democrats will retake the US House of Representatives in November 2006. As one of his first acts, he has announced that he plans to work toward the impeachment of President Bush.

Conyers, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, is reported to be preparing Articles of Impeachment against the president. He has also introduced House Resolution 635, which begins an investigation into the Bush Administration for potential impeachable offenses.

From The Conservative Voice website. Hmmmmm?


A

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 11:52 PM

Ramsey Clark Plans 'Emergency March' to Stop Israel

(CNSNews.com) - Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, along with various anti-war and Muslim groups, has announced plans for a "National Emergency March on Washington" to stop what he described as U.S. funding of the "Israeli war machine." Clark claimed that U.S. funding to Israel, which is battling Hizballah terrorists in southern Lebanon, is grounds for impeaching President Bush. "If we'd acted on impeachment before now, Lebanon wouldn't be subjected to this misery," said Clark at the National Press Club last week. "If we fail to act now, who is next?" The National Council of Arab-Americans, Partnership for Civil Justice, Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation, and the ANSWER Coalition are planning to march near the White House on Aug. 12. Full Story

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 31 Jul 06 - 11:55 PM

A Question Of Impeachment

Richard Harris Smith

July 30, 2006
This is not another "peace-nik" attack on George Bush, though international events which have unfolded on his presidential "watch" gave rise to the compelling question raised here.

The three serious attempts, over the last 140 years, to impeach an American President have all been based on alleged domestic peccadilloes that might fall under the catch-all constitutional provision for removing a Chief Executive found guilty of "high crimes and misdemeanors".

So far as I'm aware, no impeachment proceeding has ever been initiated because of a President's conduct of foreign relations - not even against President Lyndon Johnson during the highly-unpopular Vietnam War.

That's probably because it would take the broadest stretch of the imagination to construe even the most flagrant presidential mis-conduct in the international arena as a "crime".

And therein lies the problem.

The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution at a time when the newly-minted American Republic had no role at all in global affairs - at a time, indeed, when democratic patron saint George Washington solemnly warned his countrymen to beware of any and all "foreign entanglements."

Even if the most far-sighted American statesmen of the late 18th century had had the clairvoyance of a Nostradamus, they could hardly have foreseen the current state of the earth - and the American planetary bid for political, economic and cultural hegemony. Nor could they have had any inkling of the development of Weapons of Mass Destruction literally capable of destroying all human life.

Today, it is a sad reality that the ineptitude or even well-intentioned fatal errors of the President of the United States in international affairs could trigger that destruction. And the trigger could be pulled in a matter of months, weeks, days - even minutes.

Our political system assumes that there is always time, within the four year span of a presidential administration, for the voters eventually to rid themselves of any occupant of the White House deemed to be merely misguided or incompetent. But dramatic world events no longer unfold in years. Waiting for a presidential election may be too late. Armageddon may overtake the balloting.

Three years ago, the voters of the state of California removed an elected Governor from office by the process called Recall. The ousted official was not guilty of any "high crimes" nor any "misdemeanor" more serious than alleged administrative incompetence. There is no comparable constitutional provision at the federal level.

But given the present perilous state of the world, and if and when a presidential administration appears to be utterly incapable of preventing that peril - perhaps there should be.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 01 Aug 06 - 09:33 AM

IRAQ -- ROBERTS STONEWALLS ON RELEASE OF PREWAR INTELLIGENCE REPORT: Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, is continuing to stall the completion of a report examining the Bush administration's use of prewar intelligence. The investigation "remains in limbo after almost three years" and has "virtually no chance" of being finished by the midterm elections in November. Despite saying nine months ago that "his report was near completion and there was no need for the fuss," the committee has only completed two of the report's five sections. The other three sections, which will probe the administration's handling of prewar intelligence and whether it manipulated evidence in its case for war against Iraq, have yet to be drafted. This latest stalling tactic is just another notch in Roberts' long record of hindering progress on the report. Last November, he dismissed the necessity of investigating the administration's use of prewar intelligence, stating, "I don't know the relevancy of that." Later that month, three committee members wrote a letter to Senate leaders noting that Roberts was not conducting a thorough investigation, including his refusal to pursue "additional interviews and documents." Roberts' continued stonewalling of the report's release has earned him the an appropriate nickname: chairman of the Senate Cover-up Committee.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 01 Aug 06 - 12:08 PM

If some diabolical anti-American mastermind had been trying, behind the scenes, to destroy this nation by secretly installing in the White House and Pentagon agents who would deliberately sink the ship of state, he or she couldn't have come up with a subversive wrecking crew more adept at the job than the Bush administration. The nation is being bankrupted by tax cuts for the obscenely wealthy and by a pointless, and endless trillion-dollar war. At the same time blood enemies are being produced with every bomb dropped, every innocent victim kidnapped and locked away in America's gulag, every child shot at a roadblock.

Clearly, though, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice et al, are not the secret agents of some malevolent foreign enemy of America. Nor is their vile reign of terror around the globe and their gutting of the Constitution here at home, simply a matter of stupid policy-making. They are, rather, home-grown enemies of American democracy, bent on subverting the country to their own ends of unbridled power.

Their goal in all this is not the stated one of "spreading democracy" at the point of a gun--a clearly ridiculous notion in any case. Rather, the goal is destroying democracy here at home, in order to establish a one-party dictatorship.

From this perspective, it is clear that far from trying to "protect the homeland," the Bush administration is happy to weaken American defenses, as it has been doing, and to manufacture enemies--whether states like Iran and Syria, or stateless organizations like Al Qaeda and Hezzbolah. The more the better. Far from trying to prevent another 9-11, one senses that this administration would like nothing better than for there to be another strike against Americans before the coming congressional elections--a second "new Pearl Harbor" as it were--to justify a full-scale crackdown on dissent, opposition, and independent thought.

George Orwell long ago imagined a world deliberately kept in a perpetual state of war, where the citizenry would accept totalitarian rule in the name of patriotism and security. We are now entering such a state. The yellow "support the troops" ribbons mindlessly pasted on the trunks and rear doors of half the cars, vans and SUVs in America are testimony to a sheep-like acceptance of the official administration line that war is good and in America's interest. I saw one such ribbon today that was particularly credulous. It read: "Remember 9-11. Support our Troops." This despite the fact that our troops are not fighting anyone who remotely had anything to do with 9-11.

We are not far from that Orwellian condition.

July 31, 2006 at 09:42:54

Making the U.S. Safe...for Dictatorship
   
by Dave Lindorff

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 02 Aug 06 - 11:53 AM

From Op-Ed NEws.com, July 27:

"...In anticipation of the House being taken back by the Democrats in the Fall, grass root planning must begin to push for impeachment proceedings now. Impeachment is the last recourse of a democratic and civil society to make right an onerous wrong.

As blood runs unabated in Afghanistan, Iraq, Africa, Asia and now Lebanon fueled by religious zealots and greed-driven military industrialists, small organizing committees will be forming across the country to tap resources from the many political factions opposed to this administration. The common cause: impeachment of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.

If for one day only in world-wide events we pull away from our own strategic causes, be them left, right, center, or progressive, and resolve to depose of this social pathogen for the good of the U.S. and indeed the world, it will speak volumes of our resolve to see that George W. Bush's last act of his tyrannical presidency will be his resignation.

Make this August 9th 2006 a memorable date. Know that impeachment is not a moot point. That there is evidence and intent. And that the first order of business of the new Congress must be to impeach George W. Bush before more lives are lost and irreparable harm to the world goes beyond the point of repair."

Related links:
http://www.abanet.org/publiced/impeach2.html
http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/grounds.html

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 02 Aug 06 - 12:22 PM

Stop the presidential power grab
CONGRESS MUST NOT CAVE TO WHITE HOUSE ON OVERSIGHT OF DOMESTIC EAVESDROPPING
Mercury News Editorial

"When President Bush's secret wiretapping program first came to light, Sen. Arlen Specter, a moderate Republican from Pennsylvania, was one of the few in the president's party to be troubled it.

Now Specter, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has done an about-face despite the fact that the program appears to violate the Constitution, circumvents the law on secret-intelligence wiretaps and is clearly a unilateral power grab by the president. Working with the White House, Specter has crafted a bill that would rubber-stamp the program. Worse, it would essentially embed into federal law the notion that the president has the power under the Constitution to conduct electronic surveillance on anyone he wants, indefinitely and without judicial oversight, making a mockery of the right to privacy. The bill could come before the Senate Judiciary Committee as early as Thursday and must be defeated.

Specifically, the president's secret program authorized the National Security Agency to monitor the international phone calls and e-mails of ordinary Americans without court approval. It clearly violates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a law that created a secret court to review and authorize intelligence wiretaps requests.

Once the program came to light, Bush claimed it was necessary because FISA did not provide enough flexibility to monitor terrorists. Yet neither Bush nor his advisers ever provided evidence that FISA, which Congress has modified twice since the Sept. 11 attacks at the request of the administration, was inadequate. And senior FBI officials testified before Congress in 2002 that the law worked well...."

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: DougR
Date: 02 Aug 06 - 04:22 PM

Hmmm. If I didn't know better, I might come to the conclusion (after reviewing the contributors to this thread) that Amos is a bit obsessed.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 02 Aug 06 - 06:16 PM

Doug:

No, I am not. But I have a strong interest in seeing criminals brought to justice, especially when they are posing as leaders.

I contribute to this thread things on its topic that are written by others. It may disturb you that there is so much talk out there; maybe there is some merit to it.

A

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 03:03 AM

From Litchfield, CY County Times:

Petition on Impeachment Not Quietly Going Away
By: Rebecca Ransom
08/03/2006
Email to a friendPost a CommentPrinter-friendly
WASHINGTON-A group of activists is going back to the Board of Selectmen this month to re-petition for a special town meeting on adopting a resolution calling for the impeachment of President George W. Bush.

Members of the informal group are currently in the process of collecting signatures on a second petition seeking a session that could put the town on record as the first municipality in the state asking that the appropriate elected officials begin an impeachment process.


In June, selectmen denied the petitioners' request 2 to 1 on the grounds that the meeting being sought would be "improper," largely because municipalities have no formal role in national issues. Republican Mark Lyon and Democrat Nicholas Solley voted against the request. Democratic First Selectman Dick Sears was in favor of allowing the town meeting.
"We will give [the Board of Selectmen] reasons why this is proper ... why this is important for the town," said petitioner Ken Cornet.

In seeking the meeting, the petitioners claim the president should be impeached on the grounds that he has "subverted the Constitution," illegally spied on American civilians, "conspired to commit the torture of prisoners" and "formally declared his intent to violate the laws enacted by Congress by appending a signing statement to legislation that asserts his right to carve out exceptions to legislation as he sees fit."
In challenging the selectmen's reasons for denying the first petition, Mr. Cornet noted that in the 1980s many towns across the country, including Washington, passed resolutions declaring the municipalities "nuclear free zones."
"There have already been resolutions on national events. It has already happened. It is already precedent," he said.
At a meeting in July, Mr. Sears suggested a compromise to the petitioners and officials-to call a special Board of Selectmen meeting instead of a town meeting. At that session, Mr. Sears said, the audience could debate the topic and vote on "a motion that the citizens present at the meeting endorse the goals in the petition presented." Mr. Sears said he borrowed this model from the towns of Cornwall and Salisbury, which held similar meetings to debate the war in Iraq.
According to Mr. Cornet, the group is choosing not to pursue that option at this time. "The whole point is that we want it to be official. Otherwise, if we just have a discussion, those who don't care won't come out and it's my personal feeling that people have to get involved in what's going on. ... . The last few weeks are evidence that we cannot just let politicians go off and do what they want," he said, referring to the violence in Israel and Lebanon.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 09:22 AM

By Kathryn Casa | Vermont Guardian

Posted August 4, 2006

BRATTLEBORO — From veterans to grandmothers, more than 50 activists representing some 100 organizations in five states turned out for a Vermont meeting unified by a single goal: a quick and concrete plan to end the war.

And if it takes impeachment to get there, they said at a follow-up rally on the Brattleboro town commons, then so be it.

"It's time to move this to a higher level of national consciousness," said organizer Dan DeWalt, a Newfane selectman and the activist behind the impeachment town meeting resolutions that passed in seven Vermont communities earlier this year.

Participants at the July 30 meeting said that although they didn't agree on every point, there was unanimous support of a "Declaration of Peace" now circulating throughout the country and planned to culminate in a week of grassroots activism and nonviolent civil disobedience in Washington starting Sept. 21 if a hard deadline for withdrawal is not met. (See sidebar).

The declaration, already endorsed by nearly 200 individual U.S. peace groups including United for Peace and Justice, a coalition of 1,400 organizations, "is a pledge to take nonviolent steps for the immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops — and to engage in peaceful protest if a comprehensive, concrete and rapid plan for an end to the U.S. war in Iraq is not established and begun by Sept. 21, 2006, just days before Congress adjourns for the fall elections," according to the website http://declarationofpeace.org.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: GUEST,Old Guy
Date: 04 Aug 06 - 11:28 PM

Seriously Amos, You better check this out.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 06 Aug 06 - 05:59 PM

ush violating Constitution

Martin H. Berman
Boca Raton
Posted August 6 2006

         E-mail story
Print story
Most e-mailed
News on your cell
RSS news feeds




MOST E-MAILED
(last 24 hours)
1.        State failures leave policyholders without a net
2.        Hurricane aid up for grabs. Interested?
3.        Minorities become a majority in Broward
4.        Online markets offer textbooks at good prices
5.        Mobile home park residents face option of buying land or moving away
See the complete list ...

        Subscribe today to the Sun-Sentinel
and find out how to get one week extra!
Click here or call 1-877-READ-SUN.


LocalLinks



Not long after George W. Bush was sworn in as the president, action was taken by him that led me to write my first letter about his presidency. In it, I stated that he had declared war against the world. Treaties the United States had entered into under previous administrations were abrogated. Laws passed by the Congress and signed into law by him were not enforced. He destroyed the largest surplus of money we had by giving tax reductions to the wealthiest people and corporations in the nation and at the same time raised the national debt limit three times in order to run the government.

Now, six years into his administration, a group of people -- conservatives, liberals, Republicans, Democrats and independents -- has determined that he is violating the Constitution. He has had the telephones of American citizens tapped without a court order. He has gone into the records of Internet companies, telephone companies and banks, violating the privacy of many. His "bring 'em on" attitude coupled with his disdain of Old Europe split our nation from those nations he is now trying to cuddle up to.

His insulting behavior toward the United Nations has come back to haunt us and now he needs the United Nations, Old Europe and those other nations in the Middle East to assist his administration in escaping the quagmire of Iraq that he so willingly rushed into.

It is time Congress began impeachment procedures against him.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 07 Aug 06 - 04:31 PM

The Democrats' Impeachment Road Map
It's finished, ready to go — and waiting for November.

By Byron York

There's a word you won't find in the text of Democratic Rep. John Conyers's new "investigative report" on the Bush administration, "The Constitution in Crisis: The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, and Coverups in the Iraq War, and Illegal Domestic Surveillance." And the word is…impeachment. Yet the 350-page "Constitution in Crisis," released last week, is, more than anything else, a detailed road map for the impeachment of George W. Bush, ready for use should Democrats win control of the House of Representatives this November. And Conyers, who would become chairman of the House Judiciary Committee — the panel that would initiate any impeachment proceedings — is the man who could make it happen.


While it's absent in the body of the report, the I-word does appear a few times in Conyers's 1,401 footnotes, which include citations of authorities ranging from the left-wing conspiracy website rawstory.com to the left-wing antiwar sites democracyrising.us and afterdowningstreet.org to the left-wing British newspaper the Guardian to the left-wing magazines The Nation and Mother Jones to the left-wing blogosphere favorite Murray Waas to the New York Times columnists Paul Krugman, Maureen Dowd, Bob Herbert, and Frank Rich to former Clinton aide Sidney Blumenthal to the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh. (Sources for "The Constitution in Crisis" even include one story co-written by the disgraced Internet writer Jason Leopold.) Relying on such material, Conyers has created what might be called the definitive left-wing blogger's history of the Bush administration. "I would like to thank the 'blogosphere' for its myriad and invaluable contributions to me and my staff," Conyers writes in the report's introduction. "Absent the assistance of 'blogs' and other Internet-based media, it would have been impossible to assemble all of the information, sources and other materials necessary to the preparation of this report."

But Conyers's report is more than the world's longest blog post. Far more seriously, it is the foundation for possible articles of impeachment, detailing charge after charge against the president. "Approximately 26 laws and regulations may have been violated by this administration's misconduct," Conyers wrote Friday in a message posted simultaneously on the DailyKos and Huffington Post websites. "The report…compiles the accumulated evidence that the Bush administration has thumbed its nose at our nation's laws, and the Constitution itself."

---

Excerpted from National Review Online

A

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 07 Aug 06 - 04:40 PM

One other little excerpt from the above:

"On the war, Conyers argues that the Bush administration's case for war, its decision to go to war, and its conduct of the war have been, in essence, an exercise in criminal fraud. The report lists four laws which Conyers says the president violated in the run-up to the war:

Committing a Fraud Against the United States (18 U.S.C. 371)
Making False Statements to Congress (18 U.S.C. 1001)
War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148)
Misuse of Government Funds (31 U.S.C. 1301)

On the question of committing a fraud against the United States, Conyers argues that President Bush, intent on "avenging [his] father and working with the neo-cons," made the decision to go to war in Iraq before asking Congress for the authority to do so. That is the heart of the alleged fraud; every act that followed, Conyers writes, was part of the crime — even if those actions do not, at first glance, appear to be criminal acts. "'Defrauding the government' has been defined quite broadly and does not need an underlying criminal offense and alone subjects the offender to prosecution," Conyers writes in a legal analysis section. "While this statute is similar to obstructing or lying to Congress…it is broader. It covers acts that may not technically be lying or communications that are not formally before Congress."

Besides the alleged fraud, Conyers also contends that the administration's preparations for war — the moving of military equipment and personnel to the Gulf region — violated at least two other laws. "Our investigation has found that there is evidence the Bush Administration redeployed military assets in the immediate vicinity of Iraq and conducted bombing raids on Iraq in 2002 in possible violation of the War Powers Resolution, Pub. L. No. 93-148, and laws prohibiting the Misuse of Government Funds, 31 U.S.C. 1301," he writes. And key elements of the president's case for war, Conyers says, violated yet another statute. "We have found that President Bush and members of his administration made numerous false statements that Iraq had sought to acquire enriched uranium from Niger," the report continues.

"In particular, President Bush's statements and certifications before and to Congress may constitute Making a False Statement to Congress in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001."

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 08 Aug 06 - 06:40 PM

The minority staff of the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee, under the leadership of Congressman John Conyers (D., Mich.) has released an in depth report on the crimes attributable to the Bushwah League.

One reviewer says:

"Day of reckoning is coming
Submitted by deepseas on Tue, 2006-08-08 17:16.
This report is invaluable, and will make the case against these crooks much smoother when the day of reckoning arrives.

Make no mistake in thinking BushCo will get off for their crimes. It may not be as soon as we'd like - it may even take years to happen. But happen it will because the American people won't stand to see them get away with this once the majority realize how their country and respect was stolen right under their noses. Many conservative Republicans are trying to distance themselves from these rogues. When the ship sinks, they don't want to go down with it, or even be associated with the disaster created from the neocons' greed.

Folks like Richie "Right Wing Kook" Rich will soon discover that:

"A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both." – Dwight Eisenhower, 34th US president

This is not about who wins; it's about what is humane and right."

See http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/constitutionincrisis.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: GUEST,Mr Snerdly
Date: 08 Aug 06 - 08:42 PM

Bush Eats Baby, Republicans Defend President

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Republicans across the nation are scrambling to defend President George W. Bush after he ate a baby during a visit to the White House kitchen early last evening.

Eye witnesses report that the president left the White House residence at around 8:05 p.m. eastern time wearing what appeared to be a crudely stitched "woman suit made from actual women".
He then entered the White House kitchen where he ate a baby with a side order of "a Cobb Salad containing raw puppy heads".

"I'm a baby eater. An eater of babies," the president told reporters this morning in the Rose Garden. "That's my job. My job is to tell the American people what I eat. And I eat babies and puppies while wearing suits of women. At least you know where I stand."

The presidential "Suit of Women" has been confirmed as having been fashioned from obese D.C. area residents who were coaxed into a nondescript van driven by Bush and his senior political advisor Karl Rove.

The women were forced to, "Put the lotion on their skin or else they get the hose again," says an anonymous White House source. The skins of the women were then harvested and sewn together into a costume which, when worn, makes the president appear to be an actual woman.

Photographs of the suit, which is allegedly flattering to the president's groin region, have yet to be released to the public.

Officials have not yet confirmed the identities of the women or the baby, but it has been confirmed that the president dropped the two-week-old child into a blender, set the device for "liquefy", then drank it down in only a few short gulps. He then decapitated several puppies, dropped them into a bed of lettuce and, "Scarfed it down like a Viking," said a White House kitchen employee.

REPUBLICANS DEFEND AND SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT

"Our goal isn't to play the blame game during an on-going investigation because the investigation is going on in an on-going kind of way indicative of an investigation," White House press secretary Scott McClellan told reporters. "There's a time for that and that time isn't now."

Republicans, however, are already calling for an investigation into the "inaction" of the White House kitchen staff for allowing this to happen.

"I'm not going to engage in the blame game. That baby was stupid for not running away and calling 911 for assistance," said House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX). "And I've seen the president's woman suit up close and I can tell you, it's better than mine. Never-the-less, the kitchen staff should be held accountable for letting this happen on their turf."

"I'm not going to engage in the blame game. That baby was stupid for not running away and calling 911 for assistance," said Republican Senator Trent Lott. "And I've seen the president's woman suit up close and I can tell you, it's better than mine. Never-the-less, the kitchen staff should be held accountable for letting this happen on their turf."

"I'm not going to engage in the blame game. That baby was stupid for not running away and calling 911 for assistance," said conservative Fox News host Sean Hannity. "And I've seen the president's woman suit up close and I can tell you, it's better than mine. Never-the-less, the kitchen staff should be held accountable for letting this happen on their turf."

"That baby was stupid for not running away and calling 911 for assistance," said formerly unknown conservative talk radio host Studs Pepperoni. "And I've seen the president's woman suit up close and I can tell you, it's better than mine. Never-the-less, the kitchen staff should be held accountable for letting this happen on their turf."

"Those women should be penalized for allowing themselves to get so fat and thus ripening themselves for skin harvesting," Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) commented on a Pennsylvania cable access show. Santorum had no comment on the puppies.

Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh blamed former president Bill Clinton, "Folks, the eees-syooo here has nothing to do with babies or women or blenders or puppies. This has everything to do with Bill Clinton -- you know something folks -- Snerdly is telling me to cut it, but -- ummmm -- the nigg -- you know, I mean babies -- Clinton had eight years to stop babies from being ingested."

BLOGOSPHERE REACTION

While progressive bloggers are calling for the immediate arrest and impeachment of the president, denizens of the right-wing blogosphere immediately weighed in with their thoughts on the presidential crisis.

"Whiny libs are fags." -GOPawesome420.

"Shut up traitors attaking the prez is just showig your faggy lib colors." -Dittofan56.

"You lost, we won, get over it you whiny homos." -Nospinguy57.

BUSH FAMILY REACTION

The president's mother, Barbara Bush told reporters during a visit to Texas, "Those puppies were going to be used as fishing bait anyway, they're much better off now. BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHA! HAHA! HA!"

"It hurts me to the core that the liberal elite have begun to attack my boy," former president George H. W. Bush said Friday. "I know my boy and he's a compassionate, caring person. He could've eaten the baby alive, but he took the care to blend it up first. Round and round doing that thing a blender does down there."

LIKE A MERRY-GO-ROUND

Congressman Tom DeLay added this morning, "I bet the baby thought it was an amusement park ride. The blender must've been like a merry-go-round then the president's throat was like a fun water slide."

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 02:49 AM

Ellison calls for Watergate-style hearings on Bush administration
Last update: August 10, 2006 – 12:01 AM
        Minneapolis Star Tribune

Rep. Keith Ellison called Wednesday for Watergate-like congressional hearings into what he called the expansion of executive authority by the administration of President Bush.
The Minneapolis DFLer made the announcement on the 32nd anniversary of the resignation of President Richard Nixon. "They had a Congress that was willing to ask the hard questions and hold the executive responsible," he said.

Ellison called "unacceptable" an expansion of the executive branch's power during the Bush presidency.

He stopped short of calling for impeachment, saying a body of evidence first must be accumulated through hearings.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Old Guy
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 08:56 AM

Half of Americans Still Believe In WMDs - They Saw Them on TV
Center for Media and Democracy

August 9, 2006

A recent Harris Poll reports found that while "the U.S. and other countries have not found any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, surprisingly more U.S. adults (50%) think that Iraq had such weapons when the U.S. invaded Iraq. This is an increase from 36 percent in February 2005."

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m25622&l=i&size=1&hd=0

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 09:24 AM

"Let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer, but the right answer."

   John F. Kennedy

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 08:52 PM

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration drafted amendments to the
War Crimes Act that would retroactively protect policymakers from
possible criminal charges for authorizing any humiliating and
degrading treatment of detainees, according to lawyers who have seen
the proposal.

The move by the administration is the latest effort to deal with
treatment of those taken into custody in the war on terror.

At issue are interrogations carried out by the CIA, and the degree to
which harsh tactics such as water-boarding were authorized by
administration officials. A separate law, the Uniform Code of
Military Justice, applies to the military.

The Washington Post first reported on the War Crimes Act amendments
Wednesday.

One section of the draft would outlaw torture and inhuman or cruel
treatment, but it does not contain prohibitions from Article 3 of the
Geneva Conventions against "outrages upon personal dignity, in
particular humiliating and degrading treatment." A copy of the
section of the draft was obtained by The Associated Press.

Another section would apply the legislation retroactively, according
to two lawyers who have seen the contents of the section and who
spoke on condition of anonymity because their sources did not
authorize them to release the information.

One of the two attorneys said the draft is in the revision stage, but
that the administration seems intent on pushing forward the draft's
major points in Congress after Labor Day.

"I think what this bill can do is in effect immunize past crimes.
That's why it's so dangerous," said a third attorney, Eugene Fidell,
president of the National Institute of Military Justice.

Fidell said the initiative is "not just protection of political
appointees, but also CIA personnel who led interrogations."

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 10 Aug 06 - 11:48 PM

Excerpted from "The Ether Zone

---

A CASE FOR IMPEACHMENT
I PRAY IT'S NOT TOO LATE

By: Norma Sherry



Impeachment is a serious indictment. In our recent history, President Richard M. Nixon resigned before he could be impeached for lying, covering up and ordering very un-presidential orders. It was a very sad day and for many of us it was the end of our idealism and trust. Then, there was the act of impeachment of President William H. Clinton, in which he was later acquitted because his crimes did not rise to the level of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" as required by our Constitution. However, he was caught lying and covering up about a distasteful and unprofessional presidential act in and around his desk in the oval office. Two presidents, two vastly different extremes, but both were caught and both were duly chastised. One was removed from office; the other remained, but his presidency was forever stained.

Today, we have a president, George W. Bush, who has lied to the American people, caused an unnecessary war and in so doing has disrupted, ruined, and killed many American service men and women. He has single-handedly destroyed our reputation around the world, grown our national debt to an astonishing figure that none of us will see repaid in our lifetimes, and he has, by his actions, killed, maimed, and destroyed tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women, and children. He has, by his negligence and disdain for the clear and evident science, altered our ability to save our planet from the ravages of global warming. He has undermined and destroyed our natural resources by his wanton neglect and insistence that he alone is the 'decider'. He has allowed his oil rich cronies hold us hostage to obscene fuel increases while they fill their coffers with even more obscene financial gains. Perhaps even more awful is his following in his father?s footsteps in allowing and standing silent as we continue to build, sell, and drop munitions with depleted uranium, which will forever alter all who eat, breathe, or drink in its remains. He has destroyed our Constitution and Bill Rights; ignored the Geneva Convention perpetrating and blessing torture and unlawful imprisonment. He's allowed spying on American citizens with illegal wiretaps.



What does it take folks to get your ire up? It boggles the mind that with all the evidence that this president should be impeached that in fact, he has remained above the fray. How is it possible? Are political lines so vital that we as citizens are less concerned for correcting wrongs and punishing wrong-doers than we are for supporting our political party? We weren't always so blindsided. Certainly, when President Clinton was brought up on charges, even his most strident supporters did not defend the indefensible. Compared with the crimes perpetrated upon this nation by this sitting president and past criminal actions by past presidents it is unconscionable that 40% of American citizens still stand by and support President George W. Bush. I ask again, how is it possible?

We are living in tenuous times. Some even believe the end times. But then again, storytellers of biblical prophecy have always warned of impending doom. But one doesn't have to consult the Bible to see the world around us is in serious trouble: sadly, much of which is imposed upon the populace by the few and mighty. Pollution threatens our ability to breathe fresh, clean air. Global Warming is real and a very serious problem. Warmongers bully and hold nuclear weapons in the balance. The Middle East is in crisis. Starvation, torture, murder, destruction of the human race is happening every day in Somalia and Darfur. Disease and lack of vital nutrition and drinkable water threaten the lives of millions around the world. Here at home are homeless families living in cars without gasoline, food banks unable to feed all the hungry, abused children, beaten down and downtrodden parents no longer able to meet the demands of keeping their families safe and healthy. ...

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Old Guy
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 10:25 AM

The Prez is less trustworthy than Bankers but more trustworthy than the Media.

Harris Poll August 8, 2006

WHO WOULD YOU GENERALLY TRUST?

"Would you generally trust each of the following types of people to tell the truth, or not?"
.......................Would..Would Not..Not Sure
.......................Trust....Trust....Refused
.........................%........%.........%
Doctors.................85.......12.........3
Teachers................83.......15.........2
Scientists..............77.......19.........4
Police officers.........76.......21.........3
Professors..............75.......19.........6
Clergymen or priests....74.......22.........4
Military officers.......72.......26.........3
Judges..................70.......24.........5
Accountants.............68.......28.........3
Ordinary man or woman...66.......26.........8
Civil servants..........62.......32.........6
Bankers.................62.......34.........3
The President...........48.......47.........4
TV newscasters..........44.......51.........5
Athletes................43.......47........10
Journalists.............39.......58.........3
Members of Congress.....35.......63.........3
Pollsters...............34.......54........12
Trade union leaders.....30.......60........10
Stockbrokers............29.......63.........8
Lawyers.................27.......68.........5
Actors..................26.......69.........5

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 11 Aug 06 - 09:08 PM

From the Amador, CA Ledger-Dispatch

Abuse of power?
Friday, August 11, 2006
- Billie Shields, Railroad Flat
As American citizens we are in a state of sloth. We accept breaches of the Constitution without raising an eye. As an American citizen it is our duty to defend our constitution and what it stands for. We didn't elect a king or dictator, but a president who should be held accountable for his actions. If we don't uphold the rights that each of us has as a citizen and if we don't keep the balance of power, then we will lose the rights and freedoms that have been fought for, for the last 300 years.

It's not a matter of Democrat or Republican, it's a matter of preserving our country and what it stands for at its highest level.

When Richard Nixon abused power, Congress held a serious, bi-partisan investigation that resulted in articles of impeachment. Strong evidence suggests that George Bush and Dick Cheney launched an illegal war and lied to Congress, spied on Americans without court approval, leaked classified information, produced phony news reports, imprisoned without charge and tortured targeted civilians and used illegal weapons. Ask your Congress member to co-sponsor House Resolution 635 for an investigation.

Billie Shields
Rail Road Flat

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 12 Aug 06 - 04:42 PM

David Swanson writes:

...nd I heard two familiar lies escape Bush's lips yesterday, when he said our enemy was Islamic fascists, and when he said Americans are safer now than before 9-11. The origin of our danger lies not in the murderous intentions of a small number of Muslims, but in the massive crimes of the gang of thugs pushing our country in a fascist direction. And we are decidedly less safe with each passing year, our nation is more hated, terrorist incidents are more frequent.


Polls suggest that most of the U.S. troops in Iraq want to come home, but Bush says we should support the war to support the troops. Meanwhile it is the military holding the chickenhawks back from putting nuclear options on the table. Bush is using our troops for his power and profit. I've seen veterans for war make a point of pride out of being used. I recently spoke on a panel in San Diego and mentioned that Suzanne Swift had been lied to by recruiters. Paul Hackett was on the panel and said "You know, that's life."


Actually that's death for some of the young men and women who have been lied to and sent to Iraq. I'll tell you what's life. Life is doing what Ricky Cousing is doing, what Lt. Watada is doing, what everyone must summon the courage to do. And life is impeachment. This war cannot be ended except by removing Bush and Cheney from office.


So, we need to keep passing impeachment resolutions in towns and cities and pushing for passage of one in a state legislature. And we need to push impeachment if we are going to win. Beginning August this month.


We do not need to choose between impeachment and elections; we need to promote impeachment if we are going to win any elections.

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 11:15 AM

From the New Jersey Courier-Post:

Saturday, August 12, 2006

Re: "Congress sends stem cell bill to veto-wielding Bush" (C-P, July 19).

President Bush has no problem sending U.S. troops to Iraq, where more than 2,500 have died and thousands have been injured. That's not counting innocent civilians.

It was obvious the congressional vote to override Bush's veto on funding was orchestrated to come up short of the votes needed.

Bush had a hand-picked audience to give him a standing ovation when he vetoed the bill.

The man is a blight on our country and should be impeached. His disregard for the Constitution should be enough grounds.

They had a lot less on President Clinton, but the Republicans pushed for impeachment. Where are all those law-and-order officials now?

BOB PARR Pennsauken

Subject: RE: BS: A Declaration of Impeachment
From: GUEST,Woody
Date: 14 Aug 06 - 09:33 AM

Bush rating up sharply: poll
Published: Monday, 14 August, 2006, 01:14 PM Doha Time

WASHINGTON: Confidence in President George W Bush's handling of domestic security rose sharply in the wake of the British foiling of a plot to blow up aircraft, a new poll by Newsweek showed yesterday.

Fifty-five percent of people surveyed on Thursday and Friday – coinciding with the news that Britain had arrested two dozen people who had allegedly plotted to blow up several US-bound aircraft – said they trusted Bush's handling of homeland security, Newsweek said.

That was a jump from 44% in Newsweek's May poll.


http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=102450&version=1&template_id=43&parent_id=19