McGovern: Impeach Bush, Cheney Now
The former Democratic nominee for president who ran against a president later driven from office under threat of impeachment, today said that impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney is "the rightful course for an American patriot."
George McGovern, a former South Dakota Senator who ran on the Democratic ticket in 1972 as an anti-war advocate, wrote in an op-ed for The Washington Post that, while he steered clear of calling for the impeachment of Richard Nixon in the '70s - fearing it would appear as "an expression of personal vengeance" against his opponent who won re-election in a landslide - McGovern said after seven years of the current administration, he has "belatedly and painfully concluded that the only honorable course for me is to urge the impeachment" of the president and the vice president.
McGovern also called the case for impeaching Mr. Bush and Cheney "far stronger" than what was the case against President Nixon and Vice President Spiro T. Agnew after the 1972 election.
McGovern admits that while there is little bipartisan support for instituting impeachment hearings (House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, has announced that impeachment is "off the table"), he said, "Bush and Cheney are clearly guilty of numerous impeachable offenses.
"They have repeatedly violated the Constitution. They have transgressed national and international law. They have lied to the American people time after time. Their conduct and their barbaric policies have reduced our beloved country to a historic low in the eyes of people around the world. These are truly 'high crimes and misdemeanors,' to use the constitutional standard."
McGovern says that American democracy has been "derailed" by the administration's commitment to "a murderous, illegal, nonsensical war against Iraq … done without the declaration of war from Congress that the Constitution clearly requires, in defiance of the U.N. Charter and in violation of international law. This reckless disregard for life and property, as well as constitutional law, has been accompanied by the abuse of prisoners, including systematic torture, in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949."
"How could a once-admired, great nation fall into such a quagmire of killing, immorality and lawlessness?" he writes.
McGovern writes that while Mr. Bush and Cheney made counterterrorism the battle cry of their administration, "their policies (especially the war in Iraq) have increased the terrorist threat and reduced the security of the United States.
"Today, after five years of clumsy, mistaken policies and U.S. military occupation, Iraq has become a breeding ground of terrorism and bloody civil strife."
McGovern said any impeachment proceedings should also look at the "collapse of presidential leadership" in the face of Hurricane Katrina, "perhaps the worst natural disaster in U.S. history."
In November Rep. Dennis Kucinich introduced a resolution, H.R. 333, calling for impeachment proceedings against Vice President Dick Cheney, which - in part because of a belief such proceedings would embarrass the Democratic leadership - was passed with overwhelming Republican support. House leaders submitted the resolution to the Judiciary Committee, where it has sat ever since. Kucinich later added that he would demand impeachment hearings against the president as well.
But while Committee Chair John Conyers, D-Mich., has advocated impeachment in the past, since the Democrats regained a majority in the House he has been more sanguine about the issue. He has suggested that such hearings could turn villains - "people who should be documented in history as making many profound errors and violating the Constitution" - into victims.
House Speaker Pelosi has likewise dismissed calls for impeachment, suggesting that hearings would detract Congress from other business, or might create a backlash among voters in November 2008, thereby threatening the Democrats' current hold on the majority.
That argument doesn't hold sway with Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fla., who with two other House members - Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., who also sit on the Judiciary Committee - recently called for an immediate start to hearings.
In an op-ed they penned, published last month in the Philadelphia Inquirer, the three wrote that, unlike the Republicans' investigation into President Bill Clinton's personal relations, "the Democratic Congress can show that it takes its constitutional authority seriously and hold a sober investigation, which will stand in stark contrast to the kangaroo court convened by Republicans for Clinton."
One aspect of holding impeachment hearings that has attracted attention is that, unlike other congressional hearings where the administration has claimed executive privilege to resist releasing documents or subpoenaed testimony, there is no protection of executive privilege allowed under an impeachment investigation.
Therefore, any documents and testimony relating to the destruction of videotapes depicting torture, to the firings of U.S. attorneys, to the outing of a CIA operative, to secret energy meetings involving Cheney and oil industry figures, to surveillance of Americans without court-order warrants or any other controversy which the White House has refused to produce for Congress, must be given in evidence.
"Impeachment is unlikely, of course," McGovern wrote. "But we must still urge Congress to act. Impeachment, quite simply, is the procedure written into the Constitution to deal with presidents who violate the Constitution and the laws of the land. It is also a way to signal to the American people and the world that some of us feel strongly enough about the present drift of our country to support the impeachment of the false prophets who have led us astray.
"I believe we have a chance to heal the wounds the nation has suffered in the opening decade of the 21st century. This recovery may take a generation and will depend on the election of a series of rational presidents and Congresses. At age 85, I won't be around to witness the completion of the difficult rebuilding of our sorely damaged country, but I'd like to hold on long enough to see the healing begin."
By David Morgan
Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved. George McGovern, a former South Dakota Senator who ran on the Democratic ticket in 1972 as an anti-war advocate, wrote in an op-ed for The Washington Post that, while he steered clear of calling for the impeachment of Richard Nixon in the '70s - fearing it would appear as "an expression of personal vengeance" against his opponent who won re-election in a landslide - McGovern said after seven years of the current administration, he has "belatedly and painfully concluded that the only honorable course for me is to urge the impeachment" of the president and the vice president.
McGovern also called the case for impeaching Mr. Bush and Cheney "far stronger" than what was the case against President Nixon and Vice President Spiro T. Agnew after the 1972 election.
McGovern admits that while there is little bipartisan support for instituting impeachment hearings (House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, has announced that impeachment is "off the table"), he said, "Bush and Cheney are clearly guilty of numerous impeachable offenses.
"They have repeatedly violated the Constitution. They have transgressed national and international law. They have lied to the American people time after time. Their conduct and their barbaric policies have reduced our beloved country to a historic low in the eyes of people around the world. These are truly 'high crimes and misdemeanors,' to use the constitutional standard."
McGovern says that American democracy has been "derailed" by the administration's commitment to "a murderous, illegal, nonsensical war against Iraq … done without the declaration of war from Congress that the Constitution clearly requires, in defiance of the U.N. Charter and in violation of international law. This reckless disregard for life and property, as well as constitutional law, has been accompanied by the abuse of prisoners, including systematic torture, in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949."
"How could a once-admired, great nation fall into such a quagmire of killing, immorality and lawlessness?" he writes.
McGovern writes that while Mr. Bush and Cheney made counterterrorism the battle cry of their administration, "their policies (especially the war in Iraq) have increased the terrorist threat and reduced the security of the United States.
"Today, after five years of clumsy, mistaken policies and U.S. military occupation, Iraq has become a breeding ground of terrorism and bloody civil strife."
McGovern said any impeachment proceedings should also look at the "collapse of presidential leadership" in the face of Hurricane Katrina, "perhaps the worst natural disaster in U.S. history."
In November Rep. Dennis Kucinich introduced a resolution, H.R. 333, calling for impeachment proceedings against Vice President Dick Cheney, which - in part because of a belief such proceedings would embarrass the Democratic leadership - was passed with overwhelming Republican support. House leaders submitted the resolution to the Judiciary Committee, where it has sat ever since. Kucinich later added that he would demand impeachment hearings against the president as well.
But while Committee Chair John Conyers, D-Mich., has advocated impeachment in the past, since the Democrats regained a majority in the House he has been more sanguine about the issue. He has suggested that such hearings could turn villains - "people who should be documented in history as making many profound errors and violating the Constitution" - into victims.
House Speaker Pelosi has likewise dismissed calls for impeachment, suggesting that hearings would detract Congress from other business, or might create a backlash among voters in November 2008, thereby threatening the Democrats' current hold on the majority.
That argument doesn't hold sway with Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Fla., who with two other House members - Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., who also sit on the Judiciary Committee - recently called for an immediate start to hearings.
In an op-ed they penned, published last month in the Philadelphia Inquirer, the three wrote that, unlike the Republicans' investigation into President Bill Clinton's personal relations, "the Democratic Congress can show that it takes its constitutional authority seriously and hold a sober investigation, which will stand in stark contrast to the kangaroo court convened by Republicans for Clinton."
One aspect of holding impeachment hearings that has attracted attention is that, unlike other congressional hearings where the administration has claimed executive privilege to resist releasing documents or subpoenaed testimony, there is no protection of executive privilege allowed under an impeachment investigation.
Therefore, any documents and testimony relating to the destruction of videotapes depicting torture, to the firings of U.S. attorneys, to the outing of a CIA operative, to secret energy meetings involving Cheney and oil industry figures, to surveillance of Americans without court-order warrants or any other controversy which the White House has refused to produce for Congress, must be given in evidence.
"Impeachment is unlikely, of course," McGovern wrote. "But we must still urge Congress to act. Impeachment, quite simply, is the procedure written into the Constitution to deal with presidents who violate the Constitution and the laws of the land. It is also a way to signal to the American people and the world that some of us feel strongly enough about the present drift of our country to support the impeachment of the false prophets who have led us astray.
"I believe we have a chance to heal the wounds the nation has suffered in the opening decade of the 21st century. This recovery may take a generation and will depend on the election of a series of rational presidents and Congresses. At age 85, I won't be around to witness the completion of the difficult rebuilding of our sorely damaged country, but I'd like to hold on long enough to see the healing begin."
By David Morgan
Popular in Politics
- For GOP, scandals could be an electoral plus - or minus 309 Comments
- IRS targeting overlooked biggest soft money groups
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice" 327 Comments
- Republicans use IRS scandal to tar Obamacare
- Romney condemns "breach of trust" in Washington
- Where is the Benghazi cover-up Republicans promised? 405 Comments
- Ousted IRS chief: "I did not mislead" the American people 261 Comments
- Why Obama should worry that current scandals might impact 2016 241 Comments
Dimnowits don''''''''t know the truth. They make it up as they go.
Posted by mudrose at 04:03 PM : Jan 07, 2008
Oh no manhole Bush caught on tape Liberals making things up again.
YouTube - Bush saw 1st plane hit WTC on 9/11
Not many people were able to see the First plane hit the WTC ...
Watch video - 18 sec - www.youtube.com/watch?v=Btmfs-0zujQ
Posted by mudrose at 03:57 PM : Jan 07, 2008
Go ahead manhole tell everyone that Nixon did not say it Libs are making things up again.
FACT: As Nixon was Impeached...In its Three Articles of Impeachment, the Judiciary Committee charged Nixon with High Crimes and Misdemeanors, including obstruction of justice, ...
inetresults.com/impeach/nixon.html - 7k - Cached - Similar pages
Modified limited hang out
FACT: March 22, 1973 meeting between Richard Nixon, John Dean, John Ehrlichman, John Mitchell, and H.R. Haldeman:
PRESIDENT: You think, you think we want to, want to go this route now? And the--let it hang out, so to speak?DEAN: Well, it''''s, it isn''''t really that--HALDEMAN: It''''s a limited hang out.DEAN: It''''s a limited hang out.EHRLICHMAN: It''''s a modified limited hang out.PRESIDENT: Well, it''''s only the questions of the thing hanging out publicly or privately.
[2]
Before this exchange, the discussion captures Nixon outlining to Dean the content of a report that Dean would create, laying out a misleading view of the role of the White House staff in events surrounding the Watergate burglary. In Ehrlichman''''s words: "And the report says, ''''Nobody was involved,
Posted by mudrose at 03:57 PM : Jan 07, 2008
Even when its on tape or part of the official record manhole thinks it%u2019s made.
In 1984 a CIA manual for training the Contras in psychological operations was leaked to the media, entitled "Psychological Operations in Guerrilla War".[4][5]
The manual recommended Cselective use of violence for propagandistic effects and to Cneutralize government officials.
An influential report on alleged Contra atrocities was issued by lawyer Reed Brody shortly before the 1985 U.S. Congressional vote on Contra aid. The report was soon published as a book, Contra Terror in Nicaragua (Brody, 1985). It charged that the Contras attacked purely civilian targets and that their tactics included murder, rape, beatings, kidnapping and disruption of harvests.
The Iran-Contra Affair was a political scandal occurring in 1987 as a result of earlier events during the Reagan administration in which members of the executive branch sold weapons to Iran, an avowed enemy, and illegally used the proceeds to continue funding anti-Sandinista rebels, the Contras, in Nicaragua
Posted by mudrose at 03:57 PM : Jan 07, 2008
Even when its on tape or part of the official record manhole thinks it%u2019s made.
In 1984 a CIA manual for training the Contras in psychological operations was leaked to the media, entitled "Psychological Operations in Guerrilla War".[4][5]
The manual recommended Cselective use of violence for propagandistic effects and to Cneutralize government officials.
An influential report on alleged Contra atrocities was issued by lawyer Reed Brody shortly before the 1985 U.S. Congressional vote on Contra aid. The report was soon published as a book, Contra Terror in Nicaragua (Brody, 1985). It charged that the Contras attacked purely civilian targets and that their tactics included murder, rape, beatings, kidnapping and disruption of harvests.
The Iran-Contra Affair was a political scandal occurring in 1987 as a result of earlier events during the Reagan administration in which members of the executive branch sold weapons to Iran, an avowed enemy, and illegally used the proceeds to continue funding anti-Sandinista rebels, the Contras, in Nicaragua
Posted by ricrawson
Nice take on an Administration that has given its utmost to protect its country. It has been a thankless job to say the very least.
I know nothing is coincidental and without purpose. And even this, in Hindu metaphysics, is only the play of the consciousness of God, and, in a manner of speaking, "illusion."
At some point, I believe all of us will be grateful to Bush and Cheney for their personal, spiritual sacrifice that gives us the opportunity to examine our relationship with our innermost values.
Posted by nokoolaid
Dimnowits don''t know the truth. They make it up as they go.
Posted by nokoolaid
If he was that irrelevant, you wouldn''t be frothing at the mouth. Drink your nokoolaid. I''m sure it''s tastier than the koolaid.
Did you know that Clinton dismantled 94% of our intelligence resources? In other words our intelligent resources around the world were severely impaired. So what intelligence Bush got, was not even 65% accurate. Wilson was a putz just like Plame so don''t go there, because his argument is stupid. Okay ***?
Did you know it was Clinton that said Sadaam had weapons of mass destruction and the Clinton Doctrine called for regime change? So if Sadaam didn''t have WMD''s, and Clinton dismantled intelligence, how could he lie. And is Bush some sort of a magician that he can convince 475 people into believing that we should go to war when the Clinton Democrats when Clinton was in office all agreed to regime change?
Did you know that because of Clinton and his police action policies the terrorists were emboldened by WTC I and USS Cole and the African Embassies? Hence was Clinton who was playing with his banana not derelict in his duties that caused WTC II? So just about everything you accuse Bush of has its history rooted in the Clinton Administration. And you azzholes now root toot toot for the Billary. You and the rest of your left wingnuts haven''t a leg to stand on let alone one reason to accuse Bush of not protecting the country. If you still had a Clintoid in the WH, he probably would have invited them for dinner and let the country go to hell. Who are you kidding joker?