No MSM press on Kucinich 35 Articles of Impeachment!!!!
Posted by Truthserum on Wed, 06/11/2008 - 22:06 in http://rinf.com/alt-news/politics/the-heinous-crimes-of-george-w-bush-in...
Wednesday, June 11th, 2008
By Elaine Brower & Cheryl Abraham
Monday, June 9, 2008 was an astoundingly historic night for the United States of America. In the evening a mild mannered Congressman named Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) took to the floor of the House of Representatives and began to read a startling document, a document laying out 35 articles of impeachment against George W. Bush.
For five hours Congressman Kucinich read clearly and concisely each of the 35 counts against President Bush. Occasionally taking sips from a cup, Kucinich didn’t falter, didn’t take a break, and didn’t seem to tire with the long reading, in fact right up to the last article Kucinich, with unwavering passion, said for the 35th time that evening:
“In all of these actions and decisions, President George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and Commander in Chief, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, President George W. Bush, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.”
These 35 astounding, criminal, impeachable, and in many cases monstrous offenses were spoken out loud for all to hear and watch on CSPAN. So where was the rest of the media, the supposed fourth estate? Where’s the in-depth public reporting on this occasion? Where’s Nancy Pelosi who has said all along that impeachment was “off the table” because she had seen no evidence for any criminal wrongdoing by the president and if anyone had such evidence could they “please let her know”. The evidence was read for the world to hear last night, it is now a matter of public record, and it couldn’t be more obvious that George W. Bush has committed an incredible amount of high crimes and misdemeanors.
Subscribe to this thread- Flag as offensive
- Login or register to post comments
- 1060 reads
****
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Rep._McDermott_signs_onto_impeach_impeachm...
Rep. McDermott signs on to impeachment resolutionNick Langewis and David Edwards
Published: Tuesday September 9, 2008
Congressman Jim McDermott, representing Washington's 7th district, stood up on the House floor to give his official support to efforts to impeach President Bush.
Mr. Speaker:
For the last two years I've struggled with the issue of whether the House should impeach a sitting President. Next to declaring war, impeachment is the gravest matter the House of Representatives must consider. I fully understand the gut-wrenching consequences such a national debate could precipitate. Yet, there is one fact we cannot overlook or escape: American cannot regain its moral leadership in the world if America cannot hold its leaders accountable for their actions at home.
The allegations that would warrant impeachment keep growing. They have been illuminated in recent books including The Way of the World by Ron Suskind, the book by Vincent Bugliosi, and the new book by Bob Woodward, The War Within.
Over five years ago, I tried to place asterisks in the Congressional Record next to the statements about Iraq the President made to Congress. I was attacked for saying the President would mislead us into the war, but the American people ultimately learned the truth.
There seems to be no end to the allegations and we have a responsibility to investigate their authenticity. That's why I'm signing onto a resolution to consider impeachment of the President. Without accountability, a democracy will fail. I yield back.
*******************
My gratitude to Kucinich and now McDermott is strong, regardless of the endless criticism about the snail's pace of 911 Truth compromised by a seemingly endless labyrinth of dis-info.
__________________
Freedom is an inside job
http://www.truthout.org/article/interview-with-rep-dennis-kucinich
Wednesday 16 July 2008
by: Maya Schenwar, t r u t h o u t | Interview
Congressman Dennis Kucinich.
Congressman Dennis Kucinich introduced a new article of impeachment against President Bush in the House last Thursday. In a single, pointed resolution, he charged the president with lying to Congress about the presence of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq, in order to obtain permission for a US attack.
In the hour before Kucinich brought his resolution to the floor, he sat down with Truthout for an interview.
We discussed the politics of justice, the quest for peace and the rationale for holding the administration accountable for its decisions on Iraq.
"The case for war was based on fraud," he said. "That's the core charge in this impeachment resolution. And it just takes one article to be able to force the administration and the president to the consequences of their deceit."
No one said impeachment would be an easy fight. House leadership has repeatedly stated its distaste for the idea, and even some progressive Congress members have shied away from taking such a forceful stand against the president, late in his last term. But Kucinich isn't big on easy fights: He is fond of quoting Spanish philosopher Miguel De Unamuno, who said, "Only he who attempts the absurd is capable of achieving the impossible."
Kucinich may be making some headway on the "impossible," this time around. The morning of our interview, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who had previously dismissed impeachment as "off the table," told reporters that Kucinich's resolution may well reach the Judiciary Committee for a hearing.
The congressman emphasizes that he is not deterred by the rampant, unceasing violence currently wracking our country and our world. Rather, he quotes Ralph Waldo Emerson, saying, "Every jet of chaos which threatens to exterminate us is convertible by intellect into a wholesome force."
__________________
Freedom is an inside job
That Bush deliberately told a lie, and he hasn't published those proofs, then now is the time to arrest Kucinichand charge him with high treason.
At the moment, he is little more then an opportunistic little wart hoping to attach himself to Barack.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/A-Future-without-Impeachme-by-Cheryl-Ab...
Headlined on 6/24/08:
A Future without Impeachment Paints a Bleak Picture
by Cheryl Abraham
Despite heroic efforts by Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) to bring 35 Articles of Impeachment against Bush, the wildfire of information and affirmation of these articles in print and in the blogosphere, and the efforts of so many within the impeachment movement, the main-stream media continues to marginalize Kucinich's effort by either ignoring the story altogether or publishing simplistic 200 word articles about it. Main-stream media insists, despite polls that say otherwise, that impeachment is not popular and because George W. Bush is a lame duck at this point, impeachment is unnecessary.
Is George W. Bush a lame duck? Is impeachment at this point unnecessary? What kind of future can we look forward to if Bush is never impeached? In order to answer these questions it is important to look at what impeachment is and what it would do.
Impeachment would open up investigations by the judiciary committee into the 35 Articles of Impeachment against George W. Bush.
If the judiciary committee finds that these investigations show that crimes have been committed a resolution will be issued to the House, which then goes on to a Floor vote, and if voted through by a majority will lead to a trial in the Senate.
The trial in the Senate would be run similar to a court trial, with the full Senate acting as jury with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, (John Roberts), acting as judge. Once the arguments of the prosecution and defense are heard the Senate would meet in a closed session to deliberate, the Senate would then vote in open session on each Article of Impeachment – a two-thirds vote is needed for a conviction. On conviction the official, (Bush), would be removed from office, if a two-thirds vote is not reached the official would be acquitted.
If convicted, Bush would be removed from office, but even if Bush was not convicted in the course of the impeachment spectacle the crimes of the Bush administration would be aired, debated, and proclaimed to the world. No longer could the media ignore the vast legacy of criminality that the Bush regime has perpetrated for the last seven years, and the people of the world would hear all the dark dirty secrets and crimes that this regime has kept and committed and there would be a resounding outcry for justice.
Not only would the Bush regime's deadly crimes be laid bare, but it is highly probable that an impeachment trial would completely prevent Bush from attacking Iran. Article XXI charges Bush with: "Misleading Congress and the American People About Threats from Iran, and Supporting Terrorist Organizations Within Iran, With the Goal of Overthrowing the Iranian Government". Surely with such a charge pending trial and with a public challenge on the validity of any action against Iran being heard in the Senate, no declaration of war could be acted upon during that time.
The fact that George W. Bush has pushed and continues to push for war with Iran shows that he is far from a lame duck. Bush and his administration are continuing their agenda unabated and virtually unchallenged. Impeachment could be instrumental in preventing Bush from starting another illegal, pre-emptive, and baseless war.
Not only can impeachment lay bare the crimes of the Bush regime for the world to see, remove Bush from office, and at the same time prevent war with Iran, impeachment can also serve another extremely vital function: the impeachment process can serve as an example to future leaders of what will happen to them if they decide to subvert the rule of law.
But what will happen if Kucinich's 35 Articles of Impeachment quietly die in judiciary committee and the crimes of the Bush regime are not investigated? If the Bush regime's crimes are not investigated will these crimes then become accepted behavior by America's leaders? If no one is held to account for authority over-stepped, laws undermined, rule of law flouted, and torture codified, what's to stop the next president, and the next and the next and the one after that from following suit?
To allow George W. Bush to go virtually unchallenged in any significant and legal way now is to allow a foundation of corruption and despotism to be laid at the feet of every president after him: an absolutely flawless model for sidestepping accountability and practicing unchecked and unfettered powers.
Imagine a progression and a continuation of the agenda of the Bush regime year after year. Imagine the aftermath that a pre-emptive and deadly bombing of Iran will have on the world, not only the horrendous death and destruction such an act would immediately cause, but the worldwide economic fall-out, and the possibility of an increase in the ferocity of the wars already being waged and the likely increase in terrorism in retaliation for the actions of George W. Bush. Such a future portends to be a much darker version of our current reality.
A future without impeachment paints a frighteningly bleak picture, a picture that at this point many of us can see but too few of us are acting to prevent. If ever there was a time to act, now is that time. Congressman Kucinich has promised to re-introduce the 35 Articles of Impeachment against Bush within 30 days of the first introduction if the judiciary committee does not act. That's just a few short weeks from now. It's time, right now, to promote the necessity of impeachment as widely as possible. It is imperative that the Bush regime be driven from office and held accountable for its many crimes - it's time to act now.
___________________
Freedom is an inside job
http://rawstory.com/news08/2008/06/18/kucinich-threatens-60-impeachment-...
Kucinich threatens 60 impeachment articles if Judiciary doesn’t act
By Nick Juliano | Uncategorized | Wednesday, 18 June 2008
Rep. Dennis Kucinich warned the House Judiciary Committee that it would be wise not to ignore the 35 articles of impeachment against President Bush last week. If the committee does not act within a month, he plans to introduce even more articles.
The Ohio Democrat and former presidential candidate tells the Washington Post’s Sleuth blog that he’s not giving up his fight to kick Bush out of the White House.
Kucinich tells us he’s giving the House Judiciary Committee 30 days to act on his resolution proposing 35 articles of impeachment against President Bush or else he’ll raise even more hell on the House floor. Thirty-five articles was just the tip of the iceberg. If Judiciary does nothing, he’ll go back to the House floor next month armed with nearly twice as many articles.
“The minute the leadership said ‘this is dead on arrival’ I said that I hope they believe in life after death; because I’m coming back with it,” Kucinich vowed in an interview with the Sleuth this week. “It’s not gonna die. Because I’ll come back with more articles. Not 35, but perhaps 60 articles.”
__________________
Freedom is an inside job
And Congress is going to ignore Kucinich, again.
and they will be right to do so, wouldn't they?
because, as we all know, it's a waste of time to investigate people.
it's just plain annoying.
is a waste of time, money, energy, and national attention.
you state a conclusion. how did you arrive at this conclusion? what makes this investigation a waste?
it will take the entire time of what is left of the Bush presidency. There is no proof that Bush invented the reports that led to the war.
Or is the conclusion you were referring had to do with Congress ignoring Kucinich, as usual?
How much time it takes is irrelevant. Some murders in almost every major US city are still open, years after the act has been committed. We will not stop before all crimes are accounted for, and in this subject is the reason for the following site: http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/Search/Default.aspx
Good summary of the false statements and people who made them.
Prosecuting Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Adams, Jackson (Wonderful little bit about Amerind genicide) and the rest of the US Presidents. Should be about the year 2230 when you get around to the first Bush, let alone the second.
so it's a waste of time because it will take time?
It will take time better spent crafting legislature to get the US past this particular economic downturn. No investigation will accomplish any good for at leats 6 months, going on historical precidence.
Craftsmanship is hardly a word to characterize the legislative practices in Congress.
Collusion and skullduggery are far more apt. What good is legislation if it applies
only to the citizenry in general and not the dictator and his well paid cronies? This
also aptly describes the status quo.
The important precedents here are the acts of the President to so subvert the balance
of power as to create a dictatorship in America. I mean acts like the signing statements
of refusal to enforce the attached legislation and the denial of Congress' right to subpoena
the executive branch, and Cheney's own private branch of government not subject
(in his theory) to any other, and many more. Failure to impeach these crooks gives all
their illegal aggrandizements of power the force of law under future administrations.
Failure to impeach the President is authorizing the establishment of a dictatorship in
America. Congress has failed its clearly defined duty to defend our form of government,
and the representatives responsible should be tried for treason, along with most of the
executive branch. A proper precedent needs to be set.
Nixon's impeachment took two months. Think it's worth it to reestablish freedom in America?
Think Congress EVER stopped a downturn with their special interest legislation, as if there
has been any other kind in recent history?
Whatever remains of our system of checks and balances has to hold up sufficiently for these Articles of Impeachment to be handled legally and consitutionally. Failure to impeach amidst so much clear and provable evidence marks the end of this country. You might as well go and get your job application for Big Oil, and the Corporatacracy.
________________
Freedom is an inside job
The evidence against Nixon was so crystal clear that few congressmen could oppose impeachment. And Nixon had over 3 years left.
Bush has 7 months. The evidence is not crystal clear.
The impeachment of Bush will do nothing for reestablishing something that was not unestablished.
Waste of time, money, air space - perfect for Kucinich.
The evidence for impeachment of Bush and Cheney is
in the public record of virtually their every official act.
Their impeachment will do more to save our system
of government than has been possible or necessary
since its very inception.
Saving the time of a group of thieving scoundrels
is worth sacrificing what remains of the citizens' voice
in government for you?
The blatant absurdity of your position makes me
doubt your sincerity.
I care about my time. I care about the time wasted by congress over gaining election points rather then fixing the government.
Your doubts are not a mortgage on reality.
unless it is legislation to repeal bad laws. We certainly don't need more laws.
Tom Mullen
www.tommullen.net
www.myspace.com/skepticsongs
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=7774
It Is NOT Too Late To Impeach
Diary Entry by George Washington
Most Americans know that Bush, Cheney and the boys have committed impeachable offenses.
But they assume it is "too late to impeach" them.
Are they right?
Well, in 1876, Secretary of War General William Belknap (who served in the administration of Pres. Ulysses Grant), accused of accepting a bribe, resigned just hours before the House was scheduled to consider articles of impeachment. The House went ahead and unanimously impeached him, and by a vote of 37-29 the Senate rejected the argument that Belknap’s resignation should abort the case.
Indeed, numerous constitutional experts have stated that Bush and Cheney can be impeached even after they are out of office.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=286277
If articles of impeachment can be introduced even after Bush and Cheney are out of office, it is obviously not too late to introduce them now, while they are still in office.
What Good Would It Do?
Many people respond, "I know we can do it, but what good would it do?"
Well, for one thing, it could prevent war against Iran or another Middle Eastern country.
And it might prevent a false flag attack.
But there is another important reason to impeach. Impeachment was designed to be a deterrent, not just a punishment. The Founding Fathers included impeachment provisions in the Constitution so that if a president tried to act like a king, Congress could nip the tyrannical impulse in the bud, and tell all future presidents "Don't try it . . . We'll stop you!"
Unless Bush, Cheney and the whole lot of them are impeached, Congress will be ignoring the wishes of the framers and instead be loudly saying to future administrations "Go ahead . . . Bush and Cheney got away with it, and so can you".
As Professor Kalt of Michigan State University College of Law writes:
Structurally, impeachment is designed not just to remove but to deter, and this effect would be severely undermined if it faded away near the end of a term.
And see this discussion with Constitutional scholar Bruce Fein.
Many rank-and-file Democrats have bought Pelosi's line that impeachment would be a "distraction", and that we should just focus on getting Obama elected.
Even putting aside the fact that a new war or terror attack would help McCain, the issue of election fraud (could McCain steal the election?), or the possibility that Bush might suspend elections in case of a "national emergency", impeachment is arguably a good election strategy for Democrats.
In any event, even from a strictly selfish, partisan perspective, the Democrats must learn the lesson that failing to impeach Richard Nixon and hold him accountable enabled Bush and Cheney to do what they've done. Unless the Democrats want to face an even more tyrannical White House in the future, they have to stand up and hold these guys accountable NOW.
___________________
Freedom is an inside job
I smell a rat!
I suppose it was to be expected.
As for the Impeachment, I've talked to family on Friday that had no idea that it was happening. Prospects of Impeachment of the President of the United States! The media has dropped the ball and so have our representatives who are not really behind this move and we have to ask ourselves why. I even have seen some commentators like Keith Olbermann and the like who rail off about Impeachment ever other day on their shows and absolute silence on the issue. When Clinton faced Impeachment for frivolous tripe Fox News couldn't shut up about it. Wouldn't we expect the same from CNN? If you haven't figured out that the media has the same controllers then here is your wake up call. This is why we must encourage a free market for news at BTM. This is a big deal and deserves more attention.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Ducking-Impeachment-in-Con-by-Dave-Lind...
June 16, 2008 at 10:29:35
Headlined on 6/16/08:
Ducking Impeachment in Congress and the Newsroom
by Dave Lindorff Page 1 of 2 page(s)
By Dave Lindorff
On Monday last week, something important happened in Washington.
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, the Democratic representative from Cleveland, OH,
who early in the primary season won some of the biggest applause lines
in the Democratic presidential candidate debates, introduced 35
articles calling for the impeachment of President George W. Bush for
high crimes and misdemeanors.
You'd be excused if you didn't know this happened. There was almost
no reporting on the event that day or the next, which took several
hours to accomplish, along with several hours Tuesday for to be read
into the Congressional Record. Kucinich's address to the House was
broadcast live on C-Span. But it was not announced in advance or
highlighted on the C-Span website, and there were not many news reports
on the historically significant fact that articles of impeachment had
been filed against the president during subsequent days.
A week later, it has still not been reported in the New York Times.
__________________
Freedom is an inside job
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Has-Kucinich-Exposed-the-D-by-Michael-C...
June 12, 2008 at 23:58:26
Headlined on 6/12/08:
Has Kucinich Exposed the Dems Complicity?
by Michael Cavlan
http://www.opednews.com
Dennis Kucinich just released 35 counts against George Bush, calling for Impeachment. He is being ignored by the media. We all need to condemn the corporate media for their continued betrayal of the public trust by its silence on this. This betrayal is even worse than the corporate media aiding the Bush Administration lies that got us into the illegal, immoral invasion and occupation of Iraq.
It is true that the brave Representative from Ohio has been marginalized and demonized by those in the corporate media. However, we must remember that that marginalization and demonization have not just been by the corporate media. There have been many willing partners in crime from within the political establishment. The corporate media blackout has had allies.
For this blackout to be broken, Progressive Democrats of America, Move On and every other progressive group need to call for Senator Obama to publicly call for Impeachment. Make it clear that if he does not do so, right now, that they will publicly withdraw support from Senator Obama and publicly support Cynthia McKinney and/or Ralph Nader. We need to make the same case for every politician running: that if they do not support Kucinich that we will publicly not support them and will indeed support any Independent that runs against them, now and in the future.
Most importantly, having Senator Obama and others making it clear that they support an Impeachment investigation will force the corporate media to cover the story. This will then provide the evidence needed to convince the American public just how deep and insidious the crimes of the Bush Administration are. This simple act of courage by progressive groups could propel Impeachment into the minds and consciousness of the public of our country. It can make the oft-heard term "holding their feet to the fire" have real meaning and relevance.
On the other hand, to not push this will do one thing and one thing only. It is unarguable that the Democratic majority has proven to be worse than spineless. For progressives to not publicly pressure the Democratic Party leadership in this manner will actually reward them for their cowardice. At this stage, this is the only leverage we have left.
Impeachment really is this important, and you all know it. Make them prove that Impeachment was not taken off the table because they had something to hide under the table. Or we can assume that they did have something to hide, in which case, they do not deserve our support. It will become undeniable that the Democratic Party leadership would rather lose the election to John McInsane and the Republicans than to push for Impeachment. It will be proof positive of their complicity, the fact that they are coconspirators in the crimes of the Bush Administration.
If we all come to that horrifying reality, we can then be truly aware of how bad the situation is that we find ourselves in. It also gives We The People the responsibility to create real and lasting change for ourselves and the world in which we live.
It is up to us progressives. This is our opportunity to shine. We can choose to follow the courage and lead of Representative of Dennis Kucinich. Let us not waste this last opportunity for accountability. History can applaud us or history can condemn us.
The choice is ours to make.
Michael Cavlan RN
Candidate US Senate 2008
Minnesota
www.michaelcavlan.org
_________________
Freedom is an inside job
Do so. You will help elect another Republican Preisdent.
Are the 4 million voters for nader in 2000 apologetic for putting Bush in the White House?
If so, I haven't read their apology.
Nader is still laughing.
not Ralph Nader and not the people that voted for him
If you want to pin it on the voters you might consider the people that voted for Bush
As I recall, Nader siphoned 4 million votes from Gore. Additionally, Nader stated sonething to the affect that if Gore couldn't beat Bush even with 4 million votes stolen, he didn't deserve to be president.
spread amongst 3 candidates. I think more choice is better. Anyway, 4 million votes is a small amount of votes compared to what Bush received in total. The main reasons in order of relevance why Bush won are because, The Supreme Court decided in his favor
close to 50% of the country (allegedly) voted for him
your Nader point has some validity but it is a distant third, also it makes the unproveable assumption that all or most of those 4 million voters would've cast their vote for Gore
It is just as easy to blame Gore for running and siphoning votes from Nader, or blame Bush for running and siphoning votes from Gore. But that is what running for election and voting is suppossed to be about, i.e. - competition
In fact, Gore/Leiberman won the popular vote by about .5 million. Any state in which Nader's votes, given to Gore, would have given Gore the electoral vote would have likely made Gore the President.