Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Chimpeach Bush? Only Third Party Candidates are Discussing it

Posted by John Nichols, The Nation at 5:53 AM on April 9, 2008.


Obama and Clinton believe accountability is "off the table."
bushchimpeach
chimpeach

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

Next week, the New Hampshire House of Representatives will be considering State Representative Betty Hall's call for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

Hall's been a courageous battler for presidential accountability and, during the presidential primary season in her state, she had an ally in Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, whose candidacy she endorsed.

Now that Kucinich is out of the race -- along with Delaware Senator Joe Biden who also dared to utter the "I" word -- the remaining Democratic contenders, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, are shying away from even the minimal discussion of accountability that they entertained when they were running in Iowa and New Hampshire.

They're playing it so safe that, when it comes to Constitutional concerns, former Georgia Republican Congressman Bob Barr -- a recently announced Libertarian contender -- is doing a better job out outlining the high crimes and misdemeanors of the president and vice president than are the contenders for the nomination of the supposed opposition party.

Green Party contender Cynthia McKinney, a former Democratic congresswoman from Georgia, actually introduced an impeachment resolution before she left the House in 2006. She continues to be solid on these issues.

But, on the current campaign trail, the most consistent crusader for impeachment remains independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader, who is something of an expert on the subject from his days of dogging former President Richard Nixon.

Nader's been thoughtful, and correct, in his assessment of the issue -- and of why it must be raised in an election year when the major-party contenders seem to be united in their determination to avoid the topic.

Here's a message Nader, who is campaigning with former San Francisco Supervisor Matt Gonzalez this year, recently sent to supporters:

As you know, Obama, Clinton and McCain have taken impeachment of Bush and Cheney off the table.

Nader/Gonzalez want to put it back on.

Our campaign will be impeachment central for this momentous election year.

No one should be above the law -- especially chronic violators.

We're building a nationwide campaign to end the corrupt two party duopoly and pressure the complicit Democrats to do their sworn duty and impeach the two unaccountable outlaws in the White House.

Last week, I wrote to House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers once again urging him to hold impeachment hearings.

This week, citizens from around the country are sitting in at Chairman Conyer's office on Capitol Hill demanding that he take action.

In that letter to Congressman Conyers, I pointed out the obvious:

Many prominent Constitutional law experts believe President Bush has engaged in at least five categories of repeated, defiant "high crimes and misdemeanors", which separately or together would allow Congress to subject the President to impeachment under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.

In addition to a criminal war of aggression in Iraq, in violation of our constitution, statutes and treaties, there are the arrests of thousands of Americans and their imprisonment without charges, the spying on Americans without juridical warrant, systematic torture, and the unprecedented wholesale, defiant signing statements declaring that the President, in his unbridled discretion, is the law.

The sworn oath of members of Congress is to uphold the Constitution.

Failure of the members of Congress to pursue impeachment of President Bush is an affront to the founding fathers, the Constitution, and the people of the United States.

Digg!

Tagged as: bush, impeachment, clinton, obama, mckinney, nader

John Nichols writes about politics for The Nation magazine as its Washington correspondent.


Report: Obama Prepared to Talk to Hamas
Barack Obama is reportedly planning to ditch President Bush's strategy of isolating Hamas, and will instead move to open contacts with the group.
Post by Faiz Shakir. January 8, 2009.
Obama Can Learn from Bush: 'We Tried' Ain't Enough
We will need to remind Obama again and again that for those voters concerned about immigration, 'almost' just ain't gonna cut it come 2012.
Post by Paco Fabian. January 8, 2009.
Rachel Maddow on 'Daily Show': 'Insulted,' 'Embarrassed' By Bush
Jon Stewart and Maddow talk Bush, Obama, Bill Clinton, MSNBC and the Munsters.
Post by Danny Shea. January 8, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Thank you, Mr. Nichols...
Posted by: oregoncharles on Apr 9, 2008 8:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
for a rare admission that McKinney, Nader, and even Bob Barr are actually better candidates than the Big 3. (A technical note: We can safely assume that Cynthia will be the Green Party nominee. While the other candidates have been members longer, her experience and record, as well as her ability to reach out to a more diverse constituency, make her just what we've been looking for.)

I would add that Cynthia McKinney is a model for progressive Democrats: she realized, as an insider, that the Democratic Party would never support her issues and values, and would even sabotage her (as they did, in two elections), and decided to help build a genuinely progressive alternative. She isn't the only one; our candidate for the 5th Congressional District in Oregon also just left the Democratic Party.

I just hope that millions of other progressives who are still addicted to the Dems will take a good look at Obama's real record (no different from Hillary's) and real proposals (downright Clintonian in their half-assedness) and make the leap. You have 7 months until the election, but you can do a lot more good if you switch in time to help with the campaign!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Thank you, Mr. Nichols... Posted by: oregoncharles
I would vote for Obama if
Posted by: LouisFallert on Apr 9, 2008 11:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
he would promise that George Bush and his cronies would be held to account. That his attorney general would bring them to trail for war crimes and other violations of international law, as well as the numerous violations of the Constitution and US law.

Fat chance. I will again vote my conscience, this election for Cynthia McKinney.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I will vote for Obama!
Posted by: paula.c on Apr 9, 2008 2:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any vote for these third, fourth or other party candidates is going to put McCain in to the Oval Office.

Use your brains. Obama is our best hope!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I will vote for Obama! Posted by: Doubtom
Obama is NOT a "nobody"...he is in fact,
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Apr 9, 2008 8:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Karl Rove's pick for a Democratic candidate. Consider--Hillary was the putative nominee, in no small part because most people living today still remember--NAFTA or NO NAFTA--the tremendous economy that the Clintons gave this country. We ALL WORKED. Remember? Nobody could go to a store without clerks handing you employment applications--hell, you couldn't go to Mickey D's without getting a job application, which people back then laughed at, because Mickey D's (and friends) were the lowest of the low on the job ladder. Remember when?

Remember? Most of us do. Only the Repukes could take NAFTA and pervert it into the massive job losses. The Clintons raised the minimum wage--the Repukes did too, by only a few cents, just in case a Clinton did get back into the White House. So Obama is actually, the Republican pick for a Democratic presidential candidate.

Nice going, Karl. We little knew when you left the White House early last year, just why you didn't stay. We all thought that maybe you had enough hearing your intellectual inferior the president, call you "Turd Blossom"--a name that describes him even better than his own given name...

Hillary would have given a wonderful 8 years. And now for the second time, Lady Nancy says that a Hillary/Obama OR an Obama/Hillary ticket, 'ain't happening'. So we want to take this opportunity to ask: "Why, Nancy? Why put the kibosh on this Dream Ticket--not just once, but twice now?"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]