Saturday, December 24, 2005
By William Rivers Pitt
The breaking strain has been reached, and those ideals we hold so dear are indeed in mortal peril. The President of the United States of America has declared himself fully and completely above the law. The Constitution does not matter to him, nor do the Amendments. Laws passed to safeguard the American people from intrusive governmental invasion have been cast aside and ignored, simply because George W. Bush finds it meet to do so.
Intolerable. Impeachable. ...
“If there was ever a time in history to impeach a President of the United States, it would be now. In my opinion, it is two years too late … Shouldn't war be an absolute last resort? We went to war because we were misled. And we should be angry because of the 2,000 American soldiers and the 200 armed coalition forces that have died. We should be livid because of the 15,000 American soldiers that have been horribly maimed and wounded. We should be disgusted because of the 30,000 innocent Iraqi civilians that have been killed and the 20,000 that are wounded after administration officials claimed that the US was going to liberate the Iraqi people. When does it stop? It stops with the indictment and impeachment of this corrupt, power-hungry, greedy group of incompetent leaders. How many more have to die before this happens?” - Barbra Streisand
The tide is turning. With your help we can make history. On July 1, 2005 we reported that 42% of Americans favored impeachment if Bush lied about the war in Iraq. That figure has now increased to 53% according to the latest Zogby poll. 53% of the people said that they agreed with the statement: “If President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should consider holding him accountable through impeachment.” ...
Some adults in the United States believe legal charges should be sought against their president, according to a poll by Rasmussen Reports for AfterDowningStreet.org.
32 per cent of respondents believe George W. Bush should be impeached and removed from office, while 58 per cent disagree. ...
Back in December of 1998, a highly partisan U.S. House of Representatives voted to impeach President Bill Clinton, making him just the second U.S. president in history to be impeached since Andrew Johnson in 1868 following the Civil War. Clinton's offense? Lying under oath about his unimpressive high-school-quality sexual dalliances with intern Monica Lewinsky. Pretty tame stuff, and not quite a threat to anyone or anything except a flimsy red dress and a Rhodes Scholar's dignity.
But what about President George W. Bush? Surely, as compared to Clinton, not only should he face a similar political fate for his war crimes and law violations here at home, but he should be thrown in an 8 x 10 jail cell and be forced to listen to an endless loop of Howard Dean's 2004 campaign speeches.
Bush surely is deserving of impeachment. Here's a partial list of what should be ample ammunition for the House and Senate to serve justice on one of the most corrupt, tyrannical and treasonous presidents in history: ...
If Bush is above the law, what is the reason for having law in the first place? Is there any point to be made about how the law actually reads if it is disregarded anyway? Following GOP calls for impeachment over a blowjob and a cum-stained blue dress, I’ve been slow to jump on board this bandwagon, but perhaps it is now time for a serious call for impeachment. For a variety of reasons, many have called for impeachment before. Others have hesitated a bit. Perhaps now we can all work together on this unified line-of-attack.
President Bush didn't bother to get court approval either before or after the fact. He ignored the long established process and approved the wiretapping without a court order and without the approval of Congress. In so doing, many believe he exceeded his presidential authority and thumbed his nose at America's checks-and-balances system of government (in which the legislative and judicial branches share power with the executive branch).
"Requiring a judge to approve a wiretap is not a nicety that can be avoided by presidential decree — it is a fundamental rule of American democracy," said Ann Beeson, associate legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union.
All Americans should be very alarmed when a government agency is permitted to listen in on phone calls or intercept private e-mail without court approval. Courts have been highly supportive when such permission has been sought, turning down just four requests in more than two decades, so there was no compelling reason for Bush to sidestep the courts. The law requires the government to get warrants from a secret federal court before there's domestic surveillance. ...
letter to the editor
After considering his latest TV performance in defending his latest scandal, I write today to sound the alarm that our President is officially out of control. Though I had not considered it a serious possibility, after reflecting on it I agree with those who say it is time to get rolling with our impeachment option. ...
The National Security Agency has traced and analyzed large volumes of telephone and Internet communications flowing into and out of the United States as part of the eavesdropping program that President Bush approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to hunt for evidence of terrorist activity, according to current and former government officials.
The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the officials said. It was collected by tapping directly into some of the American telecommunication system's main arteries, they said. ...