Nixon's case now, thanks to its new members. The president will be allow to do what ever he thinks is necessary to protect the American People. Marital law cannot be far behind this ruling, so we cannot hold elections in 2006 or something equally heinous. That is the point of bush bragging that he ordered this illegal act.

By the way, Rockefeller wrote a hand written letter to Cheney saying he disagreed with is act. He sealed and dated it. You can read it on HuPo.

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

Although Nixon would have been impeached, he resigned before charges were ever brought up.

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

The other night, as George W. Bush concluded his address from the oval office, he ended it by quoting the old civil war era Christmas carol, I Heard The Bells On Christmas Day:
The wrong will fail
And right prevail
With peace on earth
Good will toward men....
Yeah, beautiful. Leave it to these guys to take something as beuatiful as that tune out of context. He wouldn't have dared to quote that song in its entirety. Had he done that he would have had to recite these timely words:
And in despair I bowed my head,
"There is no peace on earth", I said
For hate is strong
And mocks the song
Of peace on earth
Good will towards men.
Oh well, I'm sure his heart was in the right place....I'm kidding. His heart is never in the right place, is it?

Happy Christmas, everyone.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net

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

To hell with impeachment, this war criminal needs to be indicted at the very least for the mass murder of Iraqis. The invasion of Iraq reminds me of the nazi german invasion of Poland.

bush is thumbing his nose at every decent person on the planet in my opinion. He does not even try to lie about his criminality anymore. He flaunts it to the entire world.

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

Mr. Bush appears to be manifesting personality disorder symptoms quite similar to Mr Nixon including megalomanic tendencies, denying wrongdoings and blaming others. Both presidents created their own reality (delusions) justifying their behavior.
Mr. Bush appears to be writing the laws (in his own mind) he then proclaims justifies his actions as legal. Clearly, the law he violated was written expressly to prevent future presidents (after Nixon) from unilaterally trampling American Citizen's civil liberties. Emboldened by being allowed to unilaterally and pre-emptively invade a sovereign nation planted the seeds of entitlement to now unilaterally and pre-emptively invade our civil liberties. How could he argue that he is acting to protect us against terrorists whan at the same time he receives failing grades in impementing the 9/11 Commission's recommendations.
Rigging election returns, presenting selective, unvetted CIA intelligence to justifying invading Iraq, leaking sensitive CIA operatives names might be soft, difficult to prove allegations. However, authorizing eavesdropping without getting the necessary warrants is a clear violation of Constitutional law that rises to a high crime.

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

Won't happen. It can't happen. We've come so far, and we're almost at armageddon with Iran and Israel and whatnot. Must persist!

Really, what would we do without this morally bankrupt anti-Christ for a president?

Sure has been an interesting five years. Here's to a few more. If we can make it past the new year, of course.

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

Bush claims extraordinary powers to protect the country. Hitler said exactly the same thing in 1933. Bush, in his own words said, "running the government would be easier in a dictatorship, as long as I'm the dictator". Bush also proclaims the 'divine right of kings', since he declares God anointed him to be president . Well, guess what folks, we now have a real-life Hitler with a messiah complex turning the USA into a fascist police state. We need to IMPEACH AND JAIL this would-be fuhrer into his own gulag of secret prisons without his day in court since he believes that enemies of the state are forever beyond legal recouse without any judical review.

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

President Bush should be impeached. If he is not, it will set a precedent that will allow future presidents to ignore the Constitution. I remember that Nixon defenders tried to argue that because, I think it was Andrew Jackson, wasn't impeached Nixon shouldn't be impeached. We must be very careful that politicians are held strictly accountable. Law is built on precedent.

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

Has it occured to you all that the NSA may be spying on AlterNet and scrutinising all mail coming in on this comment line? Look hard and you'll find it all out....as for this pisskop megalomaniac and his bunch of goons in the White House, assisted and abetted by their "see no evil" press, the moment of reckoning has come; if and only if the American public can stand up and toss out this threat to world peace and stability now! I have a constantly recurring horrofic picture playing itself in my mind: Bush toying with the button to nuclear Armageddon when he is bored, run out of ideas or something to do, or has just had a lousy day. Can the world afford that luxury; what luxury??! Toss the chump now!....

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

that Bushfuehrer and corporate pals are hiding something from the FISA court. It would have to be quite heinous, given the fact that the court usually approves everything requested. Are they employing Pointdexter's TIA (total information awareness) plan? Are the victims of their spying currently being tortured? What's beneath all this sneak and peak? I'll bet it's rated XXXX.

karen

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

I can't help but laugh (instead of crying) watching Bush in action. He acts like a CEO to me, albeit , one along the lines of Enron.

He is in my opinion well past due for impeachment, and yes he should be charged as a felon as well. He is a war criminal. Many, many people have died needlessly in a war that shows the depth of greed and is a great shame on "We The People".

America has suffered terribly for the past 5 years , and our own fears have been turned against us by those who are by definition "Sworn to Protect and uphold the law". Big Oil, Arms companies, and the many support industries have had their finger in this to, but half of the country would go out of business if we arrested those involved.

Impeach Bush, Indict his cronies, and let's take our country back, where it belongs, with the American people.

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

The House Impeaches, the Senate decides; why do you raise the issue of the court? I'm not one who is eager for impeachment, but this is a flagrant violation of law, and (unlike Nixon), Bush is bragging on it. This is a clear and present danger to our democracy, and the House must impeach.

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

King George says that merely because he has the security, safety and best interest of America at heart, we must grant him ANY POWERS, ANY tactics (up to and including torture, secret arrests and detentions, unlimited spying), and the Democrats HAVE YET TO FORMULATE an expression of outrage or resistance to this incredible usurpation of America's proud legacy of freedom and democratic rights.

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

Historically, impeachment is a device used by the GOP against Democratic Presidents who offenf their moral sensibilities. It is a joke.

Should an impeachment proceeding against Bush somehow get underway the corrupt and sychophantic GOP House leadership would crush it and Bush would be able to claim his actions were not crininal.

We must stop Bush politically. Working at the State level to elect opposition (ie, Democratic and liberal Republican) figures into state legislatures and as Governors will seriously impede the GOP agenda domestically and provide strength in the upcoming battles against the federals.

Secondly, we must have confidence in ourselves and not depend on the big people in Washington to cure this disease.

Our institutions that provide the very same things that have made us free and prosperous, an open society, respect for the individual, freedom to pursue opportunity without governmental supervision or interference and the right to hold the leaders of business as well as government accountable.

Bush has weakened each and every one of those essential rights.

In the age of globalization, how can American business prosper when foreigners fear their international conversations with us may be monitored by the NSA?

Bush has pushed us down the slope that will quickly lead to poverty and isolation.

Ask your friends whether they are willing to live with the potential BUSINESS consequences of Bush's rush toward a totalitarian state, and when they realize how much money Bush's spying program could cost them, they will end it.

Robert Chapman
Lansing, New York

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

His approval ratings have shot up during this scandal. The mob loves his rough-and toughness.

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

Why has NO ONE MENTIONED that there is no declared war upon which he may exercise that power as Commander in Chief?

No one, not the press, not those in opposition, and even the general public has not mentioned it at all and that is the crux of it. Only Congress can declare an official war and only then do war powers kick in. The war we are in is illegal and in May 2003 the pResident in the WH declared the "illegal war over and won". Remember?

The constitution is clear about how we go into an official war. Right there is the simple solution to stopping this man/lizard/nifilim.

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

I just want to see it happen. Don't care if it works or not. The thing about an impeachment ATTEMPT is that so much other, juicer tid-bits tend to ooze out of the woodwork. Some a lot more interesting than the impeachment charges. I'm waiting for the dam on this cesspool to burst.

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

I've also just read an article saying that the Bush administration had been wiretapping the UN, to find out who would be against the war in Iraq and what arguements they would use.

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

If Bush and his chumps are checking alternet, good. F all of you. Everytime I think we have had all the Bushit he can come up with, Bush adds another nail in the coffin. I can't express how angry I am at 52% of the American people for voting for this bastard. THERE IS NO UNDERESTIMATING THE INTELLIGENCE OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.

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

Thanks. Sounds like you're inside my head, as I have the same feelings about the 52%. Compounding the issue for me is the fact that most of my loved ones are amongst them, vehemently so.

The holidays will be fun this year.

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

You guys are missing the boat. It's Cheney who has to go before Bush. HE is the brains behind this neo-Con aniti-Constitutional cabal. If you impeach Bush, then you get Cheney as Commander-in-Chief. You get him in the Whitehouse, forget about the Consititution. It will be all-out war against Iran and the world would be plunged into a war like the 100 years war in Europe. Cheney is a passionate exponent of "the clash of civilizations." He knows he is in poor health and he is on a MISSION (from God) to throw this world into a new dark age before he dies. Getting rid of Bush solves nothing if we get Cheney in the Whitehouse in his stead.
TagsNOLA

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

Actually Alternet isn't that threatening to the powers-that-be. Very few people comment on here about the demolition of the world trade center and other stuff like that, even though there is a massive amount of physical evidence to support such a radical statement. The general discussion even on this site is heavily influenced by "mainstream thought", which means that most people here are too afraid to ask the right questions and look in the right places for those bits of truth that really are right in front of us.

It is not really mainstream thought I'm talking about though; it is controlled thought. Very few will question where that control comes from and how it propagates through our society. Those that do are probably the biggest threat.

Michael Moore tried to illustrate this point in BFC when he talked about how only the petty thugs made the nightly news. "A black man" this and "a black man" that... Not only is the news biased against poor, it is also racist. We are far more likely to address the racist side of the issue.

And then there's people like Alex Jones who put forth a very strong argument for how even people like Michael Moore are a part of this "controlled society". He believes that Moore was trying to make Bush look like a bumbling idiot who took too many vacations. Moore carefully avoided making any type of accusation that Bush knowingly and willfully allowed crimes to be commited in the name of massive profits. Utterly... massive... profits.

We all know what the top .1% is doing to the rest of the world, and yet somehow the idea of killing 3000 people and then completely covering it up to make hundreds of billions of dollars is too sinister a thought?... It makes no sense to me that anyone could believe that there isn't anyone out there who would kill without hesitation for a billion dollars.

But anyway the big questions don't really get asked here very often, so no, Alternet isn't that great a threat to the status quo. It is possible that Bush could be impeached and it is even more possible that nothing will change as a result. This has happened before hasn't it? With Nixon? After a brief lull the fascists came back with a vengeance and unleashed a brutal assault on this country in the form of the Reagan admin. Trillion dollar scandals became commonplace. And the middle class has been losing ground and voting against their own economic interests ever since.

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

I AM NOT A CROOK devolves into I WAS CROOKIFYING TO PREVENT TRERROISM AT HOME AND ABROAD. The scary thought is if BUSH were impeached that would give CHENEY complete and absolute power. Checks and balances are now blank checks in invisible ink. KARIN

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

Is he impeachable? I personally think he is committable.

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

The article forgot to mention that it took the New York Times a whole year to get up the intestinal fortitude to make this all public. A WHOLE YEAR! One might also ask more of these institutions (our press, etc.) in the way of keeping the public informed. I'd always thought that a well-informed public was essential to a healthy democracy.

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

see rockefeller's memo to cheney on yahoo news. if we can delay the proceedings until after we elect a democratic congress in 2006, we could be saying "hello president pelosi"

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

www.epluribusmedia.org
Read the article on The Ides of December. Smoke, Mirrors and War Powers.
This article is a must read for those who are hoping the House initiates articles of impeachment. It may be too late. While we were sleeping, the Bushfuehrer and his legions rode into our dreams. We're now living a nightmare.

karen

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

to get this Fascist master of lies out of an office he never won in the first place? They cheated to gain power, their actions are contrary to everything this country was founded on, they lie and cheat in everything they do and they have made common American citizens the enemy of the world. I keep thinking "how much more can they get away with?" and yet, everyday I read more of how they desecrate our Constitution. I’m tired of the simplistic idea that anyone against his behavior and actions is left wing. Believing in our country, fighting for our principles, standing up for what is ethically correct is not liberal, it is human. The right wing are not human, they are hate mongers hiding behind the bible. Ironically, they only represent like 15% of the population, the same percent of the population identified as gay. They are far from a majority. The rest of us, the ones that are not polarized in our ideas, THE MAJORITY, need to raise our voices together and say “We did not vote you in, but there you sit. You may have cheated before but this time, we caught you. You are fired you Fascist, racist piece of garbage”. Impeach the bastard!

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

First give the Democrats victories in the Senate. 3 of the most potential seats to knock out Republicans is MT, OH, and PA. Also, knock out Joe Lieberman and other centrist Democrats in the primaries itself, House and Senate, and replace them with real Democrats. Remember, it's the centrists in the party and the Republicans who have been keeping Bush in power these past 5 years.

P.S.: And don't worry about Diebold. If Brown or Hackett can pervade the state, rural, suburban, and urban, no amount of diebolding can affect him. Remember, Kerry didn't touch rural Ohio, only concentrated on the urban areas. That's why the bastards at Diebold were able to pick their targets which would have been difficult to do statewide.

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

To use action instead of words, you can count me in. I am much more angry with the average American than I am with Bush and Cheney. It's time to revolt. If any of you ever realizes that and finally figures out exactly what is at stake, contact me at woodford54@yahoo.com. I'm more about action than I am about complaining because if we don't do something soon our lives won't be worth living. I'm NOT afraid of the Bush spies. They are as dirty as he is.

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

Impeach him. Do it. Rise up. Take back your country or just let him keep killing your reputation on the world stage, your economy, your social stucture, and your youth.

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

What worries me is that the american people do no care enough to pressure Congress to do its duty. I don't know if it's because of seduction by the trite media, or "scandal exhaustion" (my God, there have been so many!), or just that people feel that government is so corrupt, nothing can be done about it (possibly a supportable, if nihilistic arguement). And, of course, there is the other little problem: if Bush alone is impeached for this latest blatant criminal act, Cheney becomes President – horrors!!

On thing is nearly certain, though: if Bush gets away with lying to Congress and the american people to get us into a war that has cost thousands of lives, destabilized the Middle East, created new threats to Israel, and destroyed our crediblity and relationships with the rest of the world, and now gets away with conducting Stalin-like surveillance on our own people by violating both our Constitution and the rule of law, and we let him, then there is no hope for the future of democracy in America. It...will...be...over.

Through our own neglect, we have put ourselves on the brink of losing everything that we have created over the last 216 years. Another commentator made the point that not impeaching Bush will set a precedent for allowing future presidents to commit illegal acts. Good point. We need to – we must – re-establish the most important precedent for the future of America, and by example for democracies around the world: The Rule of Law.

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

Yeah, no sooner does this crap break (and is anyone REALLY surprised?), than the news appears that KGB's (King George Bush) numbers are WAY UP thanks to his new PR campaign.
What we are seeing is a nation of scared and ignorant sheep slipping into a totalitarian cult-of-personality dictatorship.
And why wouldn't they be making note of those of us who dare to disagree? I assume that I'm showing up because of my letters that were published in various newspapers before the election, and I'm proud of that. We must dissent. We must dissent in the strongest language possible. The free exercise of our right to express our opposition must be defended at all costs. So I say let them make note of me. Too many have died to secure and preserve our rights. This is our nation and we must do what we must do to defend her. Call your representatives in Washington. Flood their phones. Write! Fax! E-Mail! This is one small patriot calling other patriots to action. God Save America!

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

I don't agree with a hell of a lot of things Bush has done, but protecting the country in the best way he can is not one of them. If it were left to the zealots they'd eliminate airport screening too. I, for one, welcome their monitoring of phone calls and emails even if I occasionally will have mine monitored too. If Bush did nothing and another attack were to occur in the US the zealots would be all over him for a dereliction of duty.

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

With the House controlled by the Republicans, you cannot get an impeachment. It's possible after the '06 election, but not bloody likely in this atmosphere of intimidation of the wimp-ass and spineless Democrats (a/k/a Dimmycrats).
Dennis
New York

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

With the House controlled by the Republicans, you cannot get an impeachment. It's possible after the '06 election, but not bloody likely in this atmosphere of intimidation of the wimp-ass and spineless Democrats (a/k/a Dimmycrats).
Dennis
New York

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

great spirit thank you in advance for the bucket of spines that are on their way to us .

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

If I recall correctly, I believe that the oath of office that GWB took said he would protect and defend the constitution, not trash it. He has done a number of impeachable offenses, not the least spying on American citizens, invading a country that did not threaten us in any meaningful way, torture, and on and on. If we can't get a bill of impeachment after this, we may as well just crown the bastard now.

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

Once again, according to the Constitution:

Impeachment requires a majority vote in House. Will the Democrats regain the house next November? Maybe.

Conviction and removal from office requires a two-thirds vote in the Senate. Will the Democrats acquire a two-thirds majority in the Senate in November? When pigs fly. The numbers aren't there, because only a third of the Senate is up for reelection every two years.

The best you can hope for is what happened to Clinton - the House impeaches and the Senate refuses to convict by two-thirds vote.

You could cripple the Bush Presidency, but then you'd be stuck with a crippled lame duck President until January 2009.

Short of a heart attack or a plane crash, this is the best you can hope for.

So what are Harry Reid, the New York Times and company trying to achieve? I believe Edward Abbey called it "monkey-wrenching." I think this is a game of "you monkey-wrenched the Clinton Presidency, so we'll do the same to your guy."

The courts cannot touch a sitting President or Vice-President, period. Let's keep this matter in perspective, please.

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

Bush's sublime indifference to law reflects his continuing arrogance. Any attorney could explain the results of attempting to prosecute a case using both bad law and flawed findings. Cases made using illegally acquired evidence are cases often lost. Senator Byrd's speech, "No President is Above the Law" gives us all that's necessary to impeach this megalomaniac. The federal prosecutors and judiciary will have to drain the swamp to prosecute anyone with this kind of mess as part of their evidence. Impeachment would be a good place to start cleaning up our beautiful country

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

Yeah, sure he deserves to be impeached. His crime is actually much worse than Nixon's crime. Nixon's criminal activitiy was limited to election politics - bad enough and he deserved to be driven out of office along with his criminal VP. We were fortunate that Gerald Ford was put in place to run the country afterwards. Not a great president, but not a bad one either.

Even if Bush were successfully impeached (near zero probability given the Republican controlled House, Senate, and Supreme Court), Cheney would step in as President. That dangerous meglomanaic is worse than the puppet Bush. So say we impeach both Bush and Cheney - a reasonalbe outcome given both of their criminal activities in this administration (not limited to this new revelation). Then Hastert would be president. That synchophant fool would be just as bad. The one party rule we are currently "enjoying" has the country completely tied up in this criminal administration.

Other countries can pull down a faltering government and force new elections. We cannot. There is no recall election process at the Federal level to change the whole government. And nothing short of that can make any effective change in the way the government is going.

The NY Times obviously wished to tip the election to Bush by witholding this news for a year. We need the corporate control limitations we used to have to get back to a free press.

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

While I agree with the frustration stemming from 52% of voters re-electing Bush, sometimes the doped-up, burger-fed, TV-entranced, science-mocking, Holy Crusader American public can surprise you. The articles of impeachment against Nixon brought to light a whole raft of illegal activities. Nixon then became radioactive. The public, when given the information in easy to follow little bites, concluded that Nixon was well out of control and that their Constitutional rights like cheap gas and roadside stripclubs were directly under threat from a megalomaniacal madman. The public can and will change thier perception of Bush & Cheney (link the two like shackled prisoners on a chaingaing) when their crimes are listed calmly and dispassionately, like a long laundry list. Imagine Patrick FitzGerald reading the list of crimes. There is no politics here: this is about tearing the Constitution asunder. Even if we don't have numbers for ensuring impeachment, we can create enough political fallout that Republicans will go running from Bush & Cheney, and perhaps even those cowards in the House will realize that their game of political one-upmanship is over and that Bush & Cheney really are tearing this country a new one.

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

The Today Show said several times this morning that the president's poll numbers are on the way up. What dimension are we living in when the Downing Street Memos came to nothing, and now we have absolute proof that the president committed a high crime by illegally spying on AMERICANS yet his poll numbers are now going up? And how outrageous is it that the NY Times sat on this story until after the election?!!

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

The beauty about your system... the guy with the biggest ad-spend gets to be in charge. How you managed to vote him in for another term is beyond the comprehension of every other citizen of the planet. Thanks for nothing. See how long he'd last if he was running his 'own' 'new democracy' in Iraq.

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

You may disagree with everything he stands for but you still listen when he talks. America is the same way. The Presidents message does not change from week to week. When Howard Dean speaks people could care less. I am not a conservative, I am a classical liberal or libertarian. My point is that the left has a thousand voices coming from all over the place on every issue. The President is consistent and people respond to that.

Quit using every new story as the end all for President Bush. We, thats collectively, voted him in again. Like it or hate it he has three more years. You can draw the line in the sand and say you'll wait it out until the congress changes or the White House switches party, unfortunately by simple block and tackle politics you could be waiting awhile. We need to learn to work with the Right and on compromise.

Also, look more at history. Heavily leftist programs have failed every time they were implemented. We should learn from that. And it does sound horrible but war or the threat of it is the only method that has ever preserved peace.

I am not the devil or a conservative. Really look into these issues, beyond this amusing site. I think you will quickly rationalize some of these ideas that you find so unappealing. Have a good day.

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

It's past the time for impeachment of one president. Now 'we the people' should seek federal indictments of the administration followed by investigations and indictments of the extreme right wing media owners responsible for creating so many of the daily distortions of the truth.
Ok, I'm dreaming, but dreams do come true.
No More Wars...Out of Iraq...NOW!
We've got a hell of a lot of work to do in our own backyard!

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

Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. Desperate times... You want to be properly sensitized as to what we are up against- watch the Clancy movie "The Sum of All Fears", if 9-11 wasn't enough. Still debate is a good thing and I am glad we live in a Country where free speech flourishes.

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

OK. Who is really surprised that all the people spied on are on the left side of the political spectrum? The war on terrorists is really a war on environmentalists and animal rights and human rights activists. While the murderers at Operation Rescue get a free pass, nuns who engage in civil disobedience are charged as terrorists. Environmentalists who may have engaged in minor vandalism years ago are being threatened with life in prison. That has always been the real aim of the dispicable cowards who now run the government. The war on terror is their cover.

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

Re NYT decision to help President Bush in last year's election, well it is not surprizing. Over the years we have gotten used to the Pinch and Judy show on WMD and war. Now we have to get used to the Pinch and Bill show on the White House. Although, I wish the NYT would not behave as though it has a multiple personality disorder: the news, where possible favor the administration, and the editorials, where possible, criticise the administration. They published a story that they have had for at least a year. Who knows why?
Would the Carlyle Group membership in the Board of Trustees have anything to do with that ?

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

Re NYT decision to help President Bush in last year's election, well it is not surprizing. Over the years we have gotten used to the Pinch and Judy show on WMD and war. Now we have to get used to the Pinch and Bill show on the White House. Although, I wish the NYT would not behave as though it has a multiple personality disorder: the news, where possible favor the administration, and the editorials, where possible, criticise the administration. They published a story that they have had for at least a year. Who knows why?
Would the Carlyle Group membership in the Board of Trustees have anything to do with that ?

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

All this rhetoric is good and fine, even stiring and I commend you all for your fearlessness. BUT... would you stand on the Village Green as our forefathers did and give your life for this country?

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

Everyone, I suggest that you remember that we are dealing with some politically savvy thinkers here who stand behind Bush. As a writer in the LA Times wrote yesterday, this blatant admission of surveillance ups the ante for the 2006 elections. By coming out against the surveillance, the Dems appear weak on "Security" and the "War on Terror." By claiming a Constitutional right, Bush is broadening the powers of the Presidency.......and the Dems will still look weak on Terror. George wins, all the way around, if the Dems don't hit back strong and fast. Now, I'm not saying that I support what George has done, but I am saying that it was not a mistake. Rather, it was very, very calculated. Where do the polls continue to say that George is strongest? In the so-called "War on Terror" and "Security." This is an effort, I suggest, to outflank the Dems and to keep Republican control of the House and Senate!

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

Impeachment will not happen with a GOP controlled congress. SO we need to be prepared to do an American replay of the Ukrainian Orange Revolution WHEN they steal the election again next year. Total disruption of business as usual is the only thing that will turn this around. When the business class and ruling class realize that the shit flies in THEIR faces as well, then it will begin to turn around.

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

I am quite sure that most of us detest reading quotes from dead patriots but this one seems so appropriate.

"The necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that `if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.' it is a very serious consideration...that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event." : - Samuel Adams, speech in Boston, 1771.

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

The President has become a dictator, and has broken the law.Simple as that.

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

It's interesting that Bush is defending his right to use wiretaps illegally when in 2004, he himself said that court orders were required to obtain wiretaps, even on terrorists.

"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."

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

There is nothing whatsoever illegal about the action taken by President Bush to eavesdrop on the specified foreign communications.

Read Sealed Case No. 02-001 here:

http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/fiscr111802.html


One of the more pertinent portions:

"The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it. We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President’s constitutional power."

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

It's past time to impeach.

The administration keeps using the "but Congress told us we could do it" argument.

This, is of course, irrelevant.

Congress does not have the authority to give the President the right to violate the Constitution. Any law passed by Congress and signed by the President which is in violation of the Constitution is not and never was a law.

If Congress will not impeach, then Congress is in violation of their oaths of office--and should themselves be expelled from office for failing to "protect and preserve the Constitution."

This is not a straight democracy--what the people want is filtered through their representatives. But the acid test is always-does the law lie within the authority of the Government as defined in the Constitution.

Mr. Bush has repeatably shown his distain for the law--and not just minor laws like driving 120 through a school zone, or murder, but the basic law which defines his authority and which exists specifically to protect the People from the very actions which he has taken.

Congress needs to take a stand and perform their job--which is not to appease the populace and get re-elected, but to "preserve and protect the Constitution." All other functions of Congress are subservient to this.

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

Never mind that Clinton did the same thing, and never mind the fact that it's pretty clear that the president had a legal justification for what he did, you guys never tire, do you?

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

It amazes me how complacent the democrats have been and they are still sitting on their hands! What the hell is it gonna' take to uncover Boosh as the villian he is?

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

Ok. So we impeach the criminal. So what? Who takes his place? Cheney? Or some other neocon fanatic? What we need is a housecleaning, a referendum and a new election - a complete and utter regime change. And we need a lot of changes to the electoral system, as well, not the least of which are:

1. No partisan, leaky, fallible and untraceable e-voting machines.
2. No partisan election officials (Harris, Blackwell)
3. Electoral oversight - from UN officials if necessary.
4. A complete investigation of the election, with reversable results if fraud or misconduct is found to change the outcome.
5. Spending caps or completely equal spending limits.
6. No more side issues like gay marriage and other stupid political tricks.
7. No more swiftboating bullshit.

I'm sure people can come up with more. These are just for starters.

Honest elections. Regime change. The end of the criminals, who should all be in jail. Send them all to the World Court or to their own gulags.

One promising idea is that our system is still very strong in many hearts and minds. We do believe in our freedoms and in the human rights of all the world - and the environmental importance of the world itself. We do believe in truth, in fact over superstition, and in peace on earth, however improbable that might seem given human nature as it currently manifests.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.

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

I'll give you that the Bush administration probably knew some things that - once pieced together after the fact - could have put a monkey wrench into the hijackers plans, like tightening airport screening (which the left opposes). But we are where we are and we need to do whatever we can to stop further tradegy.

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

Dear Doug Ireland . . .

I thank you for this writing. Can you imagine? An American President violates the law while in the Oval office and nothing is done?

Democrats and Republicans agree the President broke the rules; yet, we as a nation do nothing. When another President commits a morally questionable offense, one that hurts friends and family, though certainly not a nation, he is deemed the devil incarnate. To this day Clinton is charged with changing societal mores. However, when Bush is “bad”, his poll numbers climb.

I too wrote of this and welcome you to peruse my missive.

Please visit my treatise CLINTON OR BUSH? MANIPULATION OF PHALLIC OR PHILOSOPHICAL © and share your thoughts.

Betsy L. Angert Be-Think

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

Bush claims to rely on the constitution and on laws passed by congress for authority to spy on americans within the country.

1] there is no 'national security' exception to the 4th amendment, as Nixon found out.

2] Even if congressmen violated their oaths to uphold the constitution and passed a law to circumvent the bill of rights or any other constitutional provisions, it would be a nullity.

The NSA under Nixon deemed it legal to wiretap without warrant when in the national interest.

In a monumental case the SCOTUS rendered a decisive blow to such assaults on the bill of rights. They decided, 8-0, with 1 justice abstaining, they there was no 'national security' exception for the 4th amendment.

The final decision was made at least by the Friday preceding the normal Monday publications of SCOTUS decisions. It appears that someone leaked the decision to the Nixon White House. Over that weekend, political operatives scrambled to remove bugs, including the ones at Watergate. The justice that abstained from the decision was Rehnquist. Seems he was the architect of the warrantless wiretap program. It was his baby.

In the "Keith case", involving charges against Larry "Pun" Plamondon [Co-founder of the White Panthers with John Sinclair] and others, SCOTUS ruled:

"The freedoms of the Fourth Amendment cannot properly be guaranteed if domestic security surveillances are conducted solely within the discretion of the Executive Branch without the detached judgment of a neutral magistrate"

UNITED STATES v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, 407 U.S. 297 (1972)

Special issue of The Court Legacy on the Keith Case

Report on the Keith Case Panel discussion

White Panther History

Brief Bio of the principal defendant in the 'Keith case', Pun Plamondon

Pun Plamondon's life story - "Lost from the Ottawa -- the Story of the Journey Back"

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

Doug, Impeaching W would certainly be more fun than watching a Riverdance revue, but to what purpose? Even if the Democrats took over two Branches of government in 2008, the Dems have shown themselves incapable of leadership or making tough decisions. They (Democrats in federal Senate and House) have actively encouraged Mr. Bush to ravage both the Constitution and international law for his entire term. Replacing scoundrels with helpless cowards seems a waste of effort.

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

Everyone seems to have these combined. Though there are some saying the NSA would have to catch the data stream for the Pentagon. NSA has admitted they did catch some just domestic messages and did not destroy them as the law requires them to do. Where the Quaker group spying was done, I do not know.

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

"Although the Patriot Act was rushed into law just weeks after 9/11, Congress's later investigation into the attacks did not find that the former limits on FISA powers had contributed to the government's failure to prevent the attacks."

This is so ridiculous it's laughable. It's essentially saying that there were no communications that we might have been able to intercept (without these pre-Patriot Act FISA limits) that might possibly have helped us prevent the attacks. In order to know this, we would have to know the content of the conversations we could have been recording but didn't because of these restrictions, and in order to know that, somebody would have had to have recorded them! We know the government didn't (or surely the ACLU would have mentioned this in their report), and I don't believe the ACLU would have recorded them either. Therefore it's impossible to take this statement seriously.

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

...he had the decency--unlike Mr. Bush--to suffer tremendous anxiety over his decision. Lincoln's self-doubt is a virtue Mr. Bush doesn't seem to share. Additionally, in March 1863, Congress approved his suspension (suspension of habeas corpus is allowed, but only under Article I, for you strict constructionists out there).

In other words, Lincoln sought and obtained the support of Congress. Bush' claim that he "consulted" Congress is specious--additionally, the president could've gotten the same kind of retroactive authority Lincoln got by going through the court process provided by FISA.

Lincoln justified his actions by arguing that he was setting aside one element of the Constitution in order to save the Constitution itself. That's a substantially stronger argument than Mr. Bush's, who allegedly has called the Constitution "a goddamned piece of paper."

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

Once again the minions of the left think they got Bush exactly where they want him......and once again it is going exactly nowhere. Examination of the charges show that the sort of "spying" activity has been going on at least since the Carter administration and previously there has not been a single "peep" from the left. The courts have consistently ruled that the President has the power to have calls monitored on "persons of interest" in regards to national security. You folks will just have to come up with a better issue if you want Bush gone before his term ends in 3 years. Personally I hope you folks don't "get it" in regards to pushing for impeachment. The folks out here in the hinterlands are going to make you lefties pay a price for your activities in November. The idea of a Republican super majority doesn't exactly make me happy but when I consider the alternatives of Democrats coming back into power.........I can live with the GOP.

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

There's one problem I have with all of this. The people don't have the power to impeach! I understand that our elected representatives are meant to look out for the best interests of the people who elected them, but thats a ridiculous notion in practice - and only a truly uncorruptable man/woman will follow that path. I beleive in true Democracy, and if anyone knows how this issue can be taken from the hands of the Plutocrats - I'd like to know about it.

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

As someone who started supporting Howard Dean AFTER the scream, it really bugs me that folks like mr Ireland, who helped derail the only candidate who had a chance against Bush, now is santimoniously calling for his impeachment.

Ireland thinks Dean as a "centrist that Joe Trippi painted as a populist". As someone who is very liberal, we understood that Dean indeed did govern in a centrist way. That doesn't matter. It is not where one lies on the political map, it is whether or not one has courage in his/her convictions.

So while I agree with Ireland that Bush should be impeached, then turned over to the Hague, I hope he recognizes that this would not have been neccesary if he hadn't helped derail the only candidate who could have effectively opposed him in '04.

That a war here could not beat a spoiled, cowardly deserter is telling.

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

OK. This is as far as I will read your article. Could the rest of the article be so innacurate. This is just more Democrat bashing!
Quote:
"But Bush had plenty of bipartisan help from Democratic co-conspirators in keeping knowledge of this illegal spying from reaching the American public. It began in November 2001, in the wake of 9/11, and -- from the very first briefing for Congressional leaders by Dick Cheney until today -- Democrats on the Senate and House Intelligence Committees were told about it. Those witting and complicit in hiding the crime included Democratic Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, former chairman and later ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, former ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee. They knew it was a crime -- Rockefeller, for example, warned the administration against it -- and yet did not make it public. They were frightened by polls showing security hysteria at its height."
Unquote.


Unlike you, the "committee" is not allowed, UNDER LAW, to reveal what goes on in these sessions. UNDER THE LAW. That's what this whole thing is about. Get it?

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

OK. This is as far as I will read your article. Could the rest of the article be so innacurate. This is just more Democrat bashing!
Quote:
"But Bush had plenty of bipartisan help from Democratic co-conspirators in keeping knowledge of this illegal spying from reaching the American public. It began in November 2001, in the wake of 9/11, and -- from the very first briefing for Congressional leaders by Dick Cheney until today -- Democrats on the Senate and House Intelligence Committees were told about it. Those witting and complicit in hiding the crime included Democratic Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, former chairman and later ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, former ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee. They knew it was a crime -- Rockefeller, for example, warned the administration against it -- and yet did not make it public. They were frightened by polls showing security hysteria at its height."
Unquote.


Unlike you, the "committee" is not allowed, UNDER LAW, to reveal what goes on in these sessions. UNDER THE LAW. That's what this whole thing is about. Get it?

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

Jeez, you guys will do anything to hold onto your jobs.

I read the ruling you cited in a little more detail. As you mentioned, the ruling states "the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information", but the issue here is not "foreign intelligence". The issue is spying on American citizens.

The ruling you cited states in its conclusion:

Even without taking into account the President’s inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless foreign intelligence surveillance, we think the procedures and government showings required under FISA, if they do not meet the minimum Fourth Amendment warrant standards, certainly come close. We, therefore, believe firmly, applying the balancing test drawn from Keith, that FISA as amended is constitutional because the surveillances it authorizes are reasonable.

Which is as much to say that the constitutionality of FISA is two-way: it protects the rights of citizens while not encroaching on the authority of the president.

Please, no more lies and half-truths!

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

My bet is....nope! We won't. We've got three years to do it, and we'll find ourselves frustratingly impotent again - simply because those whom we have elected and those from whom we receive our news have NO INTENTION on following through on something like this. They were willing to let the 'chips fall where they may' thirty years ago with Nixon, but will do nothing this time around. It's STATUS QUO, baby, and no one will rock the boat because they like their jobs/income! PERIOD. End of story. We had a chance to get rid of this lying, election-stealing, war profiteer last year in the easiest way possible and couldn't find a way to do it.

Mark my words: NOTHING WILL CHANGE in the next three years. And the Dems will pick the lamest candidate possible (Hillary?) for the 2008 election, giving the Neo-Cons another open door. Watch! NO impeachment, NO high level indictments, NO hope from the other side of the aisle!

Do my words of truth upset you, the reader? GOOD! DO something about it! Problem is, you probably won't. And neither will those who truly have the POWER to do something, either!

But face it: NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IS COMING!
Depressing....isn't it?

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

and God said "let there be light" and there was light
and God said "let there be no consequences for wrong doings" and there before Him, was George Bush's resume.

When our leader is as close to a totalitarian dictatorship as mud is from a childs body, how can we sit here and do nothing to stand in his way. When we found out what Nixon had done, the country went into and uproar. and now again we stand with almost the same circumstances, and we do nothing to stop him. what has our country come to?

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

Hearing about the illegal tapping of private conversations by the NSA as authorized by "Big Brother" King George, reminds me of the frightening George Orwell book "1984" which once used to be required reading in high schools and colleges. Maybe if it still were, those idiots who voted to re-elect Bush in 2004 would have stayed home. All I can say is that we are stuck with "Big Brother" for 3 more years, baring any impeachment attempts which I think are doubtful, and I am afraid how far down the road toward total dictatorship Bush will take this country before people finally wake up to what is going on. My fear is that Bush will warp so many people's minds to his thinking (like Hitler did to Germany and Lenin did to Russia) that we will all wake up one day and see a Nazi flag flying where the stars and stripes should be.

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

Impeach? Why? Next in line are Cheney (god help us), Hastert (a real meathead) and Ted Stevens (senility and greed personified) Three pretty good reasons why there probably has been no attempt on the life of this doofus.

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

I suspect that there is no end to the illegal acts he has committed and will commit. He could probably give Nixon lessons. In fact he is problably having NSA send the names of posters to this forum to the IRS and the hiway patrol right now.

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

"I, George W. Bush, do solemnly swear to uphold and defend the United States constitution against all enemies both foreign and "domestic". . . . "
Is there any limit to the number of lies a single human can utter to the public? We have no hard evidence of even the slightest executive capability existing within the person of our president. If he were auditioning for a job with Donald Trump, he would be the first one ushered from the table. If he were auditioning on American Idol, the judges would double over with laughter at his inability to hit a single correct tone and his continuous forgetting of the lyrics. I would laugh too if I didn't think that his incompetence was merely a front for a malicious attack on the American constitution, being conducted for the benefit of the military/industrial complex, designed to distract our attention and have us smiling and handing over our rights without the need to fire a single shot.
Domestic enemies do exist, and they include anyone who thinks they have the ability to pre-empt the words upon which our way of life has been based. By this definition, George W. Bush must now kick his own ass.

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

Impeach Bush yourself! That's right. This is much more than just a petition.

There's a little known and rarely used clause of the in the rules for
the House of Representatives which sets forth the various ways in
which a president can be impeached. Only the House Judiciary
Committee puts together the Articles of Impeachment, but before that
happens, someone has to initiate the process.

That's where we come in. One of the ways to get impeachment going is
for individual citizens like you and me to submit a memorial.
ImpeachforPeace.org has created a new memorial based on one which was
successful in impeaching a federal official in the past. You can find
it on their website as a PDF.

You can initiate the impeachment process yourself by downloading the
memorial, filling in the relevant information in the blanks (your
name, state, etc.), and sending it in.

http://ImpeachForPeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

More information on the precedent for submitting an impeachment
memorial, and the House Rules on this procedure, can also be found at
the above address.

If you have any doubts that Bush has committed crimes warranting
impeachment, read this page: http://ImpeachForPeace.org/evidence/

If you're concerned that impeachment might not be the best strategy
at this point, read the
bottom of this page: http://ImpeachForPeace.org/

It just takes a minute to save our democracy.

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

Those lines are more timely than ever....
Pray for peace.
Tom Degan

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

Impeach Bush yourself! This is much more than just a petition.

There's a little known and rarely used clause of the in the rules for the House of Representatives which sets forth the various ways in which a president can be impeached. Only the House Judiciary Committee puts together the Articles of Impeachment, but before that happens, someone has to initiate the process.

That's where we come in. In addition to the State-byState method, one of the ways to get impeachment going is for individual citizens like you and me to submit a memorial. ImpeachforPeace.org has created a new memorial based on one which was successful in impeaching a federal official in the past. You can find it on their website as a PDF.

You can initiate the impeachment process yourself by downloading the memorial, filling in the relevant information in the blanks (your name, state, etc.), and sending it in.

http://ImpeachForPeace.org/ImpeachNow.html

More information on the precedent for submitting an impeachment
memorial, and the House Rules on this procedure, can also be found at
the above address.

If you have any doubts that Bush has committed crimes warranting
impeachment, read this page: http://ImpeachForPeace.org/evidence/

If you're concerned that impeachment might not be the best strategy
at this point, read the bottom of this page: http://ImpeachForPeace.org/

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