House Committee Hears The "I-Word"

House Members Try To Refrain From Uttering "Impeachment" In Hearing On Bush Use Of Power

(CBS/AP)  It was a forum at which the “I-word” was not to be spoken but was anyway.

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.

[Labadorable]

The complete archive of this hearing has been uploaded to UT here is the plalylist - http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=9F833EE81EC327C0

[Labadorable]

The complete archive of this hearing has been uploaded to UT here is the plalylist - http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=9F833EE81EC327C0

[neoconrcrazy]

what a fitting end if; "that gawd-dam pieces of paper", would turn around and bite his lying, false-texas azzz.....

[neoconrcrazy]

it''s a blaring condenmation of our system when we allow impeachment for a BJ but mass-murder gets a pass.

[jgunther7]

Bush is just stupid enough to figure he has nothing to lose and start another war in Iran. Hopefully an impeachment process will put the kibosh on those plans.

[wardoglrs]

If you think Bush is leaving office think again...After all would you?

[deacon20081]

I expect impeachment to start with Rice, Mulkasey, Cheney and Bush. First take out the individuals he has "appointed" then Cheney. While you cannot under law file criminal charges against Bush as a sitting president, YOU CAN DO SO IN JANUARY 2009.
Kick all of my "once" fellow republicans out of office in November and prevent the "Pardon Pen Run Amok McSame" from protecting them.

[mikelweisser-2009]

This is a somewhat balanced, though all too brief account of the 6 hour hearing and fails to quote the numerous serious specific charges by the legal experts called to testify.
Here is a longer version of coverage:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Notes-from-the-Non-Impeach-by-mikel-weisser-080726-259.html

[alphaa10-2009]

Rep. Dennis Kucinich has been right all along-- the nation''s chief executive officer is a crook and a scoundrel.

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)

[alphaa10-2009]

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)