WASHINGTON, July 26, 2008
House Committee Hears The "I-Word"
House Members Try To Refrain From Uttering "Impeachment" In Hearing On Bush Use Of Power
-
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, finishes his testimony on Capitol Hill in Washington, Friday, July 25, 2008, before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on President Bush's term. (AP Photo/J.Scott Applewhite)
The House Judiciary Committee convened a hearing to address an impeachment resolution brought against President Bush by Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, although members of the committee went to great pains to insist the purpose of the meeting was not to vote to remove Mr. Bush from office.
Instead, the hearing was aimed at the president’s use or misuse of executive powers, with constitutional and legal experts invited to weigh in on whether the American system of check and balances has been undermined by the Executive Branch.
But critics of Mr. Bush's policies couldn't pass up the chance to charge the president with a long list of impeachable "high crimes and misdemeanors."
Leading the way was Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, the former Democratic presidential candidate who has brought repeated impeachment resolutions on the House floor against the president and Vice President Cheney.
"The decision before us is whether to honor our oath as Members of Congress to support and defend the Constitution that has been trampled time and again over the last seven years," Kucinich testified.
Kucinich's resolution points to the justifications given by the White House for Congress to pass legislation authorizing the President's discretion for leading the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Kucinich noted that, contrary to claims made by President Bush and other administration officials, Iraq did not possess a means or inclination to threaten or attack the United States, did not support al Qaeda, and was not developing weapons of mass destruction.
"The decision before us is whether Congress will endorse with its silence the methods used to take us into the Iraq war," Kucinich said. "The decision before us is whether to demand accountability for one of the gravest injustices imaginable.
"The decision before us is whether Congress will stand up to tell future Presidents that America has seen the last of these injustices, not the first."
The House Democratic leadership, with no stomach for an impeachment battle in the waning months of Bush's presidency, had steered Kucinich's resolutions to the Judiciary Committee where they hoped it would quietly fade away. But Friday's hearing gave Kucinich and his allies an opportunity to air their views.
"To the regret of many, this is not an impeachment hearing," said committee chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., pointing out the less incendiary title of the event, "Executive Power and its Constitutional Limitations."
Still, Conyers noted that his panel had pursued many issues that Kucinich and others regard as impeachable offenses by the Bush administration, including manipulating intelligence about Iraq and its potential threat to the United States; overstepping the law with regard to detention and rendition; authorizing the use of torture; politicizing the Justice Department and retaliating against administration critics, as in the outing of former CIA agent Valerie Plame.
But in keeping with the gingerly motives of the hearing - like turning on a light while wearing dark glasses - the committee reminded lawmakers and those testifying that House rules prohibit "personal abuse, innuendo or ridicule of the president." The House Rules and Manual points out that suggestions of mendacity, or accusations of hypocrisy, demagoguery or deception were out of order.
In other words, no one could accuse the president of committing high crimes or misdemeanors, if they weren’t actually voting on whether he committed high crimes or misdemeanors.
Kucinich was circumspect: "The rules of the House prevent me or any witness from utilizing familiar terms. But we can put two-and-two together in our minds."
Former Los Angeles County Prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, known for his prosecution of Charles Manson in 1970, acknowledged that "I am forbidden from accusing him of a crime, or even any dishonorable conduct" under House rules.
But nonetheless he outlined some of the central accusations made in his bestselling book, "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder" (Vanguard Press), which features what he calls evidence "that proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Bush administration officials took this nation to war in Iraq under false pretenses, and therefore, under the law, they are guilty of murder for the deaths of over 4,000 young American soldiers who have died so far in Iraq fighting their war.
"I am fully aware that the charge I have just made is an extremely serious one. But let me tell you that at this stage of my career I don’t have time for fanciful reveries," Bugliosi said.
And there apparently was nothing in House rules preventing opinions, as when Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., asserted that Mr. Bush was "the worst president that our nation has ever suffered."
The panel included former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman, D-N.Y., who was on the committee when it initiated impeachment hearings against President Richard Nixon.
Also testifying was former Congressman Bob Barr of Georgia, who helped lead the Republicans' impeachment fight against President Bill Clinton. Barr, who is running as the Libertarian Party candidate for president,s aid that "Neither the Bill of Rights nor the separation of powers are self-enforcing documents or principles."
"The separation of powers, with the checks and balances expected to naturally follow, is the bedrock foundation of American constitutional government. It is a foundation clearly in danger of crumbling."
Republicans, clearly in the minority at the hearing, expressed suspicion at Democratic motives. Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Calif., called it "impeachment lite," where people were given free rein to impugn Mr. Bush but not to impeach him.
"It seems that we are hosting an anger management class," said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the committee's senior Republican. "This hearing will not cause us to impeach the president; it will only serve to impeach Congress's credibility."
"I am really astonished at the mood in this room," commented one witness, George Mason University School of Law professor Jeremy Rabkin.
"The tone of these deliberations is slightly demented," Rabkin said. "You should all remind yourselves that the rest of the country is not necessarily in this same bubble in which people think it is reasonable to describe the president as if he were Caligula."
Rep. Steve King of Iowa challenged Mr. Bush’s critics for saying he lied during his 2003 State of the Union Address, when he spoke the infamous “16 words” claiming that Saddam Hussein had sought weapons-grade uranium from Niger. Mr. Bush and other officials made that claim despite investigations from weapons experts that determined such reports were false.
King pointed to a recent article about a secret effort to remove older uranium yellow cake from Iraq, and alluded that it represented a “significant” amount that supported Mr. Bush’s claim, ignoring the fact that the uranium dated from the 1991 Persian Gulf War and had long been known to U.N. weapons inspectors.
Meanwhile, hundreds of activists spilled out of the committee room and lined the hallways outside. T-shirts reading "Arrest Bush" and "Veterans for Impeachment" illustrated the sentiments of many.
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
More From Politics
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 14
- next
See all 270 CommentsKick all of my "once" fellow republicans out of office in November and prevent the "Pardon Pen Run Amok McSame" from protecting them.
Here is a longer version of coverage:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Notes-from-the-Non-Impeach-by-mikel-weisser-080726-259.html
While being a soundrel is not technical grounds for impeachment, high crimes and misdeanors against the United States and its people very definitely are.
The Bush crime and its modus operandi are now exposed for all to see.
The Bush / Cheney scam is the most massive conspiracy of all in American politics, compromising the integrity of the entire federal executive branch.
(see "Bush Should Be Impeached"-- 2)
BUSH SHOULD BE IMPEACHED-- 2
The conspiracy blackened the reputation of an entire party, the GOP congress which abdicated its responsibility and sold its soul for power, while Bush and Cheney ran amok through the American constitutional system. .
The Bush / Cheney scam called into serious doubt the morals and integrity of even the judicial branch-- the same US Supreme Court which had so covered itself with shamefully partisan behavior to put Bush in office.
The Bush scam was all about what Cheney called the "remaining prize" in the MidEast-- the vast oil assets of Iraq. The plot began well before 911. Only six months before the twin towers fell, and promptly after moving into his office, Cheney had his secret meeting with Big Oil-- the details of which Bush and Cheney continue to deny the American public to this day.
(see "Bush Should Be Impeached"-- 3)
And well they might. By now, as the oil majors rush to the landgrab in Iraq, it becomes clear that those Americans shouting "No blood for oil!" had it exactly right.
Bushscam put the progress of America into reverse for eight long years, demolished our standing among nations, plundered the treasury, ruined the economy and wasted more than 4,000 American lives (not to mention hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives) and tens of thousands of American wounded-- all to launch the biggest political crime in American history. The Bushscam is bigger than Teapot Dome and Tammany Hall by an order of magnitude-- our grandchildren will wonder about us as they read about it in history class
Bushscam is a case of misplaced trust. In the wake of 911, the US congress gave Bush the critical mission to bring bin Laden to justice. Bush, instead, began his campaign to do anything but. The first order Bush gave Clarke, his national security adviser, was to find out how the Iraqis were involved.
(see Bush Should Be Impeached-- 4)
Bush saw 911 not as a national disaster and failure on his watch, but a joyous opportunity to bend every rule, tell every untruth to put his hands on Iraq, as if in imitation of his father. We recall Bush, Sr. managed to wrap himself in the American flag to rescue grateful Kuwait, and none called him on the hypocrisy-- not even to remind him he was the one who kept Saddam in power, and even shipped the monster his own supply of American nerve gas to use at will against whomever he might.
So, like father, like son? Not quite-- from most appearances, Bush Sr., had lost his moral compass by degrees as the cost of doing business. But son George Bush did not even understand the questions of ethics and responsibility, in the first place.
In that respect, alone, Bush is the all-time American anti-patriot. Not content with a nondescript career, he was hungry for power in the worst way. Bush is the individual who, in November, 2005, facing an assembly of his own party members critical of his NSA spying program, bristled like a teenager caught drinking after curfew-- "Stop throwing the Constitution in my face! It''s just a GD)((#@*! piece of paper!"
Is this figure, who claims to be president of the United States, the same who pledged an oath to "protect, preserve and defend" the document he calls a "GD)((#@*! piece of paper"?
20 minutes BEFORE building #7 at the world trade center fell, the BBC broadcast in special report that bldg #7 had already fallen down.
10 minutes BEFORE bldg #7 fell down, a New York Fire Captain warns his men, "Move away from #7, they gonna blow the bldg."
http://911blogger.com/node/10025
Hear it for yourself - Recorded live on sept 11.
The American people want a sane energy policy which includes opening up the absurd restrictions on oil drilling in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. It is the equivalent of a locked pantry filled with food, with Congress holding the key.
He''''s been tearin it up for almost 8 years.
It probably really upsets alot of folks without lives that THERES NOT ONE SINGLE THING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!
Posted by hurtmorons
Oh I don''t know, I can at least take satisfaction in the fact that his policies have "hurtmorons" in their pocketbooks and will continue to so as they are forced to pay for their poor judgment in 2004.
The election will pit Bong Bong McCain
backed by 99-PERCENT of all republicans,
EVERY TV news outlet, 95-PERCENT of all
web sites, an unknown number of sourgrape
Clinton voters, an unknown number of
stupid tribes people, AND 100-PERCENT OF
all WHITE RACISTS, against
Barak Obama backed by all REAL DEMOCRATS,
100-PERCENT of smart tribes people,
an unknown number of smart ex-Clinton
voters, 100-PERCENT of all black racists,
an unknown number of stupid tribes people
and 1-PERCENT of all web sites
with 4 abstaining.
America has been warned that foreign
monitors will be present at all
voting boards of election.
He''s been tearin it up for almost 8 years.
It probably really upsets alot of folks without lives that THERES NOT ONE SINGLE THING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT!
WRITE THE UNITED NATIONS WE ALL CAN DO THAT!
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 14
- next
See all 270 Comments