Many have said to me, “If we impeach Bush, big deal, we’ll still have Cheney, what would be the difference?” According to the US Constitution – it would happen. Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Judiciary Cmte. Ranking Member, just concluded his hearing on the Downing Street Memo. For the past four hours I listened to a constant revolving door of Congress people and other witnesses on how the Memo combined with other corroborative evidence is strong enough to call for impeachment.
Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution:
“The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Lying to Congress and intentionally misleading the nation into an illegal war with Iraq based on manipulated intelligence and false information could certainly qualify as high crimes and misdemeanors.
“The relevant standard for impeachment under Article II, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution is whether the President and Vice President have committed “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The purpose of the impeachment clause is to ensure that the people of the United States, through their representatives in the United States Congress, are able to hold a President accountable for abuse of power and an abuse of the public trust.”The Growing Case for a Resolution of Inquiry
If the evidence revealed by the Downing Street Memo is true - that there was a conspiracy to fix the intelligence to justify the Iraq War - then the President’s submission to Congress of his March 18, 2003 letter and report justifying the Iraq invasion to the United States Congress would violate federal criminal law. John Bonifaz of AfterDowningStreet.org writes in a memorandum to Rep. John Conyers, Jr. describes two potential criminal violations: "the federal anti-conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371, which makes it a felony ‘to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose…’; and The False Statements Accountability Act of 1996, 18 U.S.C. § 1001, which makes it a felony to issue knowingly and willfully false statements to the United States Congress.
They’re likely to broadcast the hearing on CSPAN at some point. You can watch it if you have cable TV, or you can watch it on line. As soon as they have available times I’ll post it here.
I guess I just get a little bit uncomfortable implying or saying that any individual (even a politician) is going to Heaven or Hell because it’s not like we make the descision. When somebody categorically says, “This person is going to Hell,” it feels like they are trying to take on powers that don’t belong to them.
Well Cran, Christianity is not really my thing but I do recall something in the rulebook about “Thou shalt not kill” and then there is the one about “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours goods”…
Nah, no need to go to all that trouble. Just close down the entire Department of Defense. It’ll make life a whole lot easier for Hilary next time around. Let evey man and woman defend themselves, that way there will be no arguing, or blame seekers.
I’m getting the impression now that you were serious when you thought my flames implied that W’s going to hell. Well I wasn’t, but it wouldn’t be a bad idea really
Posting the fire gif and saying “Things are heating up” were about the issue of the Downing Street Memo gaining momentum – or “heating up.”
How long, how much money, and how much taking away from other business of the country would impeachment hearings create? I barely remember Watergate (I was 14 and not really interested in government stuff at the time). I thought the entire proceedings against Mr. Clinton was a bunch of wasted time and money, and frankly didn’t follow them all that much - plus I didn’t want to chance turning the TV on and my very young kids hearing talk of b.j. and cigars.
I think our government throws away WAY too much money the way it is. I think the money spent on the war in Iraq has been tragic. But, would impeachment really CHANGE anything? Wouldn’t it be better for Congress to work on other issues and not tie up all the resources necessary for impeachment hearings?
And I know you’d like nothing better than for Mr. Bush to be legally found guilty - but would it really help or change the country? It won’t get him out of office tomorrow, or next year even, if they started the procedings today. It could be years.
It seems that many of Mr. Bush’s “pet” projects, such as the Patriot Act are going to be drastically modified or go down the tubes as it is. Isn’t that the more effective way to handle this?
I don’t want you telling me how evil Mr. Bush is - I understand your thinking in that already. I seriously want you to explain to me how the country would be better off to start down the path of impeachment…
The man could be guilty of sending THOUSANDS of innocent people (Americans and otherwise) to their deaths on the basis of a politically motivated lie. Should we let it slide because it would be inconvenient to prosecute?
Do you think Nixon should have been given a pass for watergate??
Why bother even writing down the laws if you’re not going to follow them?
How can you even ask these questions? These are the most serious crimes one could probably level against a sitting president.
If he’s not prosecuted - that leaves the door open for more deceptions, more lies, more deaths, more evil. HOw can it be more clear cut than that?? IF he is prosecuted (whatever the result) that would send a clear message to any future leader (I was about to type “ruler” and then checked myself) not to deceive the public about GOING TO WAR.
After all. . . why bother stopping the Germans when they want Czechoslovakia. It would cost a lot of money and be a big hassle. . .
Missy, I don’t really know much about all this. One thing that comes to mind is that other countries seem to have a pretty bad opinion of us. I suppose it could be worth quite a lot to show that, if it turns out we have been lied to, we seriously regret the actions we took based on the lies. Maybe some damage in our relations with other countries might be repaired? It’s just a pondering.
Worm - I’m NOT saying he’s not guilty of these things.
I’m saying I’m scared of tying up Congress for more than a year while the impeachment would go on. I think empowering Congress to DO something right now would be a much better step for the country’s well being than impeaching Mr. Bush.
How about Congress limiting the funds going to the war in Iraq? That would force the issue, wouldn’t it? How about cutting support for the Patriot Act? Voting to try the detainees at Gitmo within a stated timeframe?
I’m having trouble getting what I’m thinking into words.
I understand about “sending a message” to future Presidents about not doing what Mr. Bush has done. I just don’t know if impeachment and tying up Congress for a year or more is the best way to do that.
I never said he was “evil,” but I’ll try to answer your question.
The Bush Administration is corrupt and lacking any accountability for its’ crimes. If we, as American citizens, don’t hold them accountable – then hundreds of billions of dollars will continue being wasted on illegal wars along with the lives of far too many US soldier’s and citizens from other countries alike. The cost of impeachment will be a small price to pay when you take into consideration the ramifications of a government out of control, lying, deliberately misleading Congress and breaking constitutional and moral laws thereby destroying the credibility and respect of this country. To hold these criminals responsible and accountable would be the best possible way to spend the money required. To let them get away with it would cost more than any amount of money could possibly recompense.
ok - Cynth - I can understand that, too - but I thought we’ve been “ugly” Americans for a long time. Much longer than the past 3 years. I can remember the appreciation and gratitude that our country felt from the outpouring of other countries after 9/11 - mainly because we seem to be thought of as the “big, bad” country.
Wouldn’t getting ourselves out of Iraq as well as possible, given the circumstances, do more for our image than impeaching Mr. Bush and meanwhile continuing to flounder there? If Mr. Bush, his Cabinet, Congress, etc. is all tied up in impeachment hearings, who will be calling the shots in Iraq?
thanks - jGilder - and I do realize what you are saying is important.
I guess what I’m asking is there some way to do impeachment and NOT tie up the entire Federal Government in it? Is there a way (Constitutionally or otherwise) to make sure progress is made on those issues that need it, the war is somehow or another tied up (at least from our end) and our Representatives and Senators don’t spend the entire proceedings trying to make a “name” for themselves and be in every lead story on the nightly news?
I just don’t honestly see how this country can survive, let alone pull out of some of the crisis it’s facing, if most of the Federal government is tied up with impeachment goings on. And if status quo continues for a year (I don’t mean status quo in the Presidency) - or things get even worse - will we ever be able to overcome it?
I’m saying I’m scared of tying up Congress for more than a year while the impeachment would go on.
Congress has it’s own guilt in the matter of the war and the craven way they surrendered their own responsibility to decide on whether or not the US goes to war to the president, but holding the president to account is a primary responsibility of congress. That’s one of their most significant jobs; far more important to the constitutional health of the nation than declaring the slime-mould the official fungus of Washington DC, or conducting trade wars with China and the EU.
Yes, I do think that there is a very, very serious concern about what is going to happen in Iraq and how people will be able to manage it. I’ll have to think about this some more, Missy.
Simon wrote:
“…far more important to the constitutional health of the nation than declaring the slime-mould the official fungus of Washington DC, or conducting trade wars with China and the EU…”
Yes, but more important than Social Security, loss of jobs, environmental impact, etc?
