Will Obama “Change” The Bush Police State Or Expand It?

Now that Barack Obama has become the 44th President of the United States we offer a challenge - will those who elected him be able to progress past their fawning idolatry and actually pressure Obama to deliver on his mandate of “change,” or will the architecture of the Bush police state remain in place while the American empire expands? Read more

Obama: Impeachment of either Bush or Cheney not acceptable

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama laid out list of political shortcomings he sees in the Bush administration but said he opposes impeachment for either President George W. Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney. Read more

Pelosi slammed in L.A. on failure to impeach Bush

She was in Los Angeles to discuss her recently published book “Know Your Power: A Message to America’s Daughters.” Instead, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi got slammed by protesters screaming that she has been derelict in her duties for not authorizing impeachment hearings against George W. Bush.

The venue: more than 300 people paid $30 each Monday night at the American Jewish University (formerly known as the University of Judaism). The format: a 75-minute interview by the Rabbi Robert Wexler (not to be confused with the Palm Beach, Fla., congressman of the same name). The questions: tough but respectful. Wexler asked Pelosi about a recent Rasmussen Poll that showed a 9% approval rating for Congress.

But then, according to blogger Alan Breslauer, things turned ugly. A protester shouted that Pelosi, in not impeaching Bush for launching a war on false pretenses, had failed to live up to her constitutional duties. She shot back:

I take the oath of office to uphold the constitution of the United States and don’t tell me that I don’t do that. Why don’t you go picket the Republicans in Congress that will not allow us to have a vote on the war? This is not very effective. Not very effective.

In the video, it’s clear that most of the audience rallied to Pelosi’s side, applauding her rebuttal. According to Breslauer, protesters were escorted out by the Secret Service. *(More likely they were local police or perhaps the sergeant at arms, as Igor, one of our readers, pointed out.) But it’s also clear that the San Francisco Democrat, with a lifetime of public service, was upset.

As speaker of the House, the third-highest office — first is the president, then vice president and then speaker — I take my responsibilities deadly seriously. I try to promote bipartisanship but that’s not what the other side wants.

With war protester Cindy Sheehan now on the ballot challenging Pelosi, these challenges are likely to continue. All of which prompts C2C to wonder where the line is between free speech and good manners.

– Johanna Neuman

LA Times | Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Gravel: Take Bush to The Hague

Former Democratic candidate Mike Gravel says President George W. Bush should be taken to The Hague for war crimes rather than being impeached.

In a Monday video conference with Press TV, the former Alaska senator said President Bush does not ‘deserve’ to be impeached for invading Afghanistan and Iraq, which has resulted in the loss of ‘millions of lives’.

“An Impeachment just means you would only take away his (Bush’s) presidency. Well, he is almost done (with) his presidency. What really needs to happen is that these people have to be held accountable for the crimes they have committed,” the 78-year-old Libertarian said referring to the US president and Vice President Dick Cheney.

“If you impeach the president and vice president, Nancy Pelosi is going to become president; that is not going to happen,” Gravel added.

Gravel is an outspoken advocate of impeaching Bush and Cheney over the disinformation campaign they have led in support of their go-to-war policies.

“There is a lot of very good news that makes me tremendously hopeful that we as a nation are starting to wake up and insist our congressional representatives act to make impeachment happen now,” he had said in a statement in January after congressman Dennis Kucinich announced plans to introduce articles of impeachment against President Bush.

Press TV | Saturday, July 26, 2008

Video | Kucinich’s Statement At ‘Imperial Presidency’ Hearing

Video | Vincent Bulgliosi’s Statement At ‘Imperial Presidency’ Hearing

‘Imperial presidency’ hearing to feature 13 witnesses

Kucinich, Barr, Bugliosi among those testifying

The House Judiciary Committee has released a witness list for its hearing to examine “the imperial presidency” of George W. Bush.

Testifying Friday morning will be Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who has introduced several resolutions calling for President Bush’s and Vice President Dick Cheney’s impeachment; former Rep. Bob Barr, the Libertarian presidential candidate who led the charge to impeach Bill Clinton in 1998; Vincent Bugliosi, author of the just-released book The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder; and 10 other current and former members of Congress, constitutional experts and human rights activists.

“Americans have been waiting for Congress to hold the President accountable for his long list of misdeeds and misrepresentations. This hearing is a long overdue first step,” Kucinich said. “Congress enacted legislation authorizing the use of force against Iraq based on representations made by the White House. We now know that these representations were false and that the White House knew them to be false.”

The hearing, which was announced last week, seems to be the one Judiciary Chairman John Conyers promised to Kucinich after he introduced his second impeachment resolution aimed at Bush earlier this month. Any action on Kucinich’s articles of impeachment still seems unlikely, but the Ohio Democrat has previously said he just wants to be able to present his case.

Late Thursday afternoon, the committee released the full witness list, broken down into two panels.

Panel One

The Honorable Dennis Kucinich, Representative from Ohio
The Honorable Maurice Hinchey, Representative from New York
The Honorable Walter Jones, Representative from North Carolina
The Honorable Brad Miller, Representative from North Carolina

Panel Two

The Honorable Elizabeth Holtzman, Former Representative from New York
The Honorable Bob Barr, Former Representative from Georgia, 2008 Libertarian Nominee for President
The Honorable Ross C. “Rocky” Anderson, Founder and President, High Roads for Human Rights
Stephen Presser, Raoul Berger Professor of Legal History, Northwestern University School of Law
Bruce Fein<, Associate Deputy Attorney General, 1981-82, Chairman, American Freedom Agenda
Vincent Bugliosi, Author and former Los Angeles County Prosecutor
Jeremy A. Rabkin, Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law
Elliott Adams, President of the Board, Veterans for Peace
Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr., Senior Counsel, Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law

Conyers (D-MI) previously laid out six areas the hearing would explore:
(1) improper politicization of the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorneys offices, including potential misuse of authority with regard to election and voting controversies;

(2) misuse of executive branch authority and the adoption and implementation of the so-called unitary executive theory, including in the areas of presidential signing statements and regulatory authority;

(3) misuse of investigatory and detention authority with regard to U.S. citizens and foreign nationals, including questions regarding the legality of the administration’s surveillance, detention, interrogation, and rendition programs;

(4) manipulation of intelligence and misuse of war powers, including possible misrepresentations to Congress related thereto;

(5) improper retaliation against administration critics, including disclosing information concerning CIA operative Valerie Plame, and obstruction of justice related thereto; and

(6) misuse of authority in denying Congress and the American people the ability to oversee and scrutinize conduct within the administration, including through the use of various asserted privileges and immunities.

The hearing is scheduled for 10 a.m. Friday on Capitol Hill.

Raw Story | Nick Juliano | Thursday, July 24, 2008

Congressional hearing to examine ‘Bush Imperial Presidency’

Update: Kucinich to testify

In a release Thursday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) announced he will hold a hearing July 25 examining “the imperial presidency of George W. Bush and possible legal responses.”

The word “impeachment” was not mentioned in the announcement, but it appears the hearing is going to examine issues raised by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) in his resolution to impeach Bush. A Judiciary Committee spokesman tells RAW STORY Kucinich will testify at the hearing.

“Over the last seven plus years, there have been numerous credible allegations of serious misconduct by officials in the Bush Administration,” Conyers said in a news release. “At the same time, the administration has adopted what many would describe as a radical view of its own powers and authorities. As Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I believe it is imperative that we pursue a comprehensive review commensurate to this constitutionally dangerous combination of circumstances. Next Friday’s hearings will be an important part of that ongoing effort.”

Conyers did not say who would testify at the hearing, but he laid out a variety of abuses that would be examined, including:

(1) improper politicization of the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorneys offices, including potential misuse of authority with regard to election and voting controversies;

(2) misuse of executive branch authority and the adoption and implementation of the so-called unitary executive theory, including in the areas of presidential signing statements and regulatory authority;

(3) misuse of investigatory and detention authority with regard to U.S. citizens and foreign nationals, including questions regarding the legality of the administration’s surveillance, detention, interrogation, and rendition programs;

(4) manipulation of intelligence and misuse of war powers, including possible misrepresentations to Congress related thereto;

(5) improper retaliation against administration critics, including disclosing information concerning CIA operative Valerie Plame, and obstruction of justice related thereto; and

(6) misuse of authority in denying Congress and the American people the ability to oversee and scrutinize conduct within the administration, including through the use of various asserted privileges and immunities.

After the committee ignored Kucinich’s first impeachment attempt last month, the former Democratic presidential candidate re-introduced a single article on Tuesday. In response, Conyers promised a hearing that would accumulate “all the things that constitute an imperial presidency.”

However, Conyers indicated his unwillingness to actually vote on impeachment, regardless of Kucinich’s presentation.

While no one has really asked lately, the White House has previously brushed off questions about impeachment in the past.

“I’m not going to comment on something as ridiculous as that,” Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino said last year when asked about impeachment.

Kucinich has been relentless in his push to impeach Bush. On Tuesday, the House formally sent his latest impeachment resolution to the Judiciary Committee. Its title: “Deceiving Congress with Fabricated Threats of Iraq WMDs to Fraudulently Obtain Support for an Authorization of the Use of Military Force Against Iraq.”

He also suggested in an interview with Congressional Quarterly that the Judiciary hearing could serve as a forum for some new revelations.

“I’ve been contacted by representatives of a U.S. ally who are seeking an opportunity to appear before the Judiciary Committee,” he told CQ’s Molly K. Hooper.

“Legislative leaders of a foreign capital” have a “new angle that I haven’t thought of before but is relevant,” he said. “This interest in whether we’ve been told the truth has extended to other countries.”

Legal scholar: Evidence suggests Bush committed crimes

Law professor rebukes Democrats for letting Bush off hook

Nancy Pelosi needs to hold meaningful impeachment hearings that will focus on evidence that President Bush has committed crimes in office, constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley said Wednesday.

Turley was speaking with MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann about the House Speaker’s indication that she would let the Judiciary Committee hold an hearing to consider an impeachment article introduced by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH).

The problem, Turley says, is that Pelosi has already rendered a “not guilty” verdict on the impeachment question, and the hearing organizers are making sure they won’t be exposing any additional criminal activity. This makes the whole exercise more like a “fancy dress ball,” than a criminal prosecution, he said.

Recalling his testimony to an impeachment hearing during the Clinton administration, Turley said the Republican Congress was focused on its goal of impeaching the president in a way the Democrats simply are not.

“It covered crimes,” Turley said of Clinton’s congressional inquisition. “What [Pelosi and others are] already saying is that they’ll be talking about a wide array of abuses by the president.

“An impeachment hearing needs to be focused and it needs to deal with things directly and frankly, as whether the president committed crimes,” he continued, “And there is considerable evidence to say that the answer is yes.”

This video is from MSNBC’s Countdown, broadcast July 16, 2008.

Download video Raw Story | Thursday, July 17, 2008

Undeterred, Kucinich to introduce another impeachment article

Resolution to be read by Clerk of House

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) will formally introduce another article of impeachment against President Bush Tuesday as House leaders indicate they’re willing to convene a hearing to consider the Ohio Democrat’s arguments.

Kucinich will move for a vote on a privileged resolution Tuesday, which likely will result in the impeachment article being referred to the Judiciary Committee. The lawmaker warned he would keep coming back with the resolution if the House voted to dismiss it.

The House Clerk will read the resolution into the record Tuesday before the vote by the full House.

“If it is tabled, I will bring another impeachment resolution back this week,” said Kucinich. “Our Constitution is being destroyed. We are losing our nation to a war based on lies. I am determined to get this bill to committee for a hearing,” he said. “The President has conducted the affairs of the nation in a manner which cries out for justice and it is the Constitutional obligation of Congress to check his wanton abuses of U.S. and international law. We have troops whose lives were put on the line because the President told them Iraq was a threat to the United States and it was not. The loss of lives of our troops and of innocent Iraqi civilians is a direct result of the lies this president told to Congress. He must be held accountable.”

Earlier this week, Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers said he would let Kucinich discuss his arguments for impeachment during a hearing later this summer, but he indicated the committee likely would not act on impeachment.

“We’re not doing impeachment, but he can talk about it,” the chairman said.

The Article of Impeachment alleges that President Bush falsely told the nation that it had no other choice to go to war because Iraq was an imminent threat in possession of weapons of mass destruction, and that the President had repeatedly implied that Iraq had abetted al Qaeda in its devastating attack of 9/11. Kucinich, in his Article, cited documents which assert the White House knew the statements were false at the time they were made.

Raw Story | Nick Juliano | Tuesday, July 15, 2008

Next Page »