Advertisement
Impeachment Debate in Grays Harbor
author: Mollie e-mail: impeachbush@riseup.net
About 45 people attended the Democrat's meeting in Aberdeen to hear arguments for and against impeachment. Here are the basic arguments that were presented.
Impeachment Objections and Rebuttals
August 2, 2007
Impeachment of Bush/Cheney is hopeless; there isn't time
So the problem I have with impeachment is that there really isn't time. It'll be a long, drawn-out affair, and by the time he's actually nailed, it'll be irrelevant
o Karl Rove Spin: if he can get us to believe that we are helpless to do anything, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and his boy is safe.
o But the truth is that impeachment does not take long. Nixon, despite having won a landslide victory in 1972, resigned in August 1974 after 3 months of hearings by the Judiciary Committee—before the House could vote on articles of impeachment.
o Clinton—which felt like forever, took a total of 4 months—and that was not full-time work for the Congress. The House began in October 1998 but did not do much because everyone was running for reelection. They passed articles of impeachment without much debate on December 19th. The trial in the Senate lasted 21 days—and that did not consume them—there was no testimony given. They debated for three days and then voted on February 12th, 1999.
o Impeachment of Bush/Cheney will be even quicker because he has already been found guilty of illegal wiretapping and no one disputes his use of unconstitutional signing statements. The evidence for fraud to take us into Iraq is OVERWHELMING. And Rep. John Conyers has already conducted an investigation and issued a report in August 2006.
Impeachment is unnecessary, since they'll be out of office in 2009
But look, Bush and Cheney will be out of office in January, 2009. What's the big deal. Let's just let their terms run out, and they're history? I mean, the things you object to have already been done, haven't they? Why belabor them?
o I see you have been talking with Representative Adam Smith. He believes that the actions of Bush/Cheney will be repudiated in the 2008 election. Of course, this argument would have some weight if Bush and Cheney were actually running.
0 The reason impeachment matters is simply this:
Every President who follows will feel they have the authority to lie to Congress to take us into illegal wars, to spy on anyone without obtaining a warrant -disregarding the 4th amendment, arrest and jail anyone without due process and habeas corpus (5 and 6th amendments), use torture (8th amendment as well as the Geneva Conventions), and refuse to obey provisions of any law passed by Congress by using signing statements.
0 A precedent will be set if they leave office without these actions being repudiated. This will destroy the Constitution and our system of checks and balances.
0 Let me be clear—impeachment is not about whether we like Bush and Cheney, it is not about punishing them, and it is not a referendum on their policies. It is about holding them to account for their abuses of power.
Impeachment is about restoring the Constitution.
Impeachment is about restoring the rights of the citizens
Impeachment is about restoring the balance of power between three co-equal branches of government.
Impeachment would be a distraction from the important work of Congress
But why bother with impeachment, when the Democrats now have a majority in Congress, with a progressive agenda. Impeachment will simply detract from those efforts. Why not get on with the real work of stopping the war, mending the safety net, solidifying electoral gains? Wouldn't impeachment suck all the oxygen out of Congress?
o Given the braindead actions of Congress, it seems like the oxygen has already been sucked out. Their approval rating is lower than Bush's.
o But seriously--when did defending the Constitution become defined as a distraction?
o They all take an oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. That is the primary job.
o It is also a myth that all action would stop if impeachment begins. The committee that hears the evidence is composed of 20 Representatives: 10 Dems, 10 Reps. So, we are talking 20 people out of 435. It is hard to believe that Congress would come to a screeching halt because 20 Reps are looking at impeachment.
o Again—impeachment does not take long, as I just mentioned.
o While we can argue about how progressive the agenda is—clearly, Kucinich decided to support impeachment when it became clear that the majority of Democrats voted to support funding for the Iraq occupation.
o But for me, the bottom line is this: If I am not safe in my home from government spying without a warrant, if I can be arrested and jailed indefinitely without a trial—then a minimum wage that is less than Washington's is really irrelevant.
o For me, freedom and liberty trumps the so called progressive agenda.
Impeachment will endanger Democratic electoral prospects
Ok, so impeachment is important; impeachment is mandated by the constitution. But the Democrats have to think about elections; they don't have the luxury of doing impeachment.
o Politicians need to stand for something besides reelection.
o But it is also not true that they would be harmed by pursuing impeachment. The Democrats won a huge majority in the 1974 Congressional elections—they were not harmed by impeachment.
o Bush is just as unpopular as Nixon at this point.
o The Democrats may actually do worse by not standing up for impeachment—they look like cowards. And many people like myself will not support any candidate who does not have the courage to oppose the Iraq occupation and who does not sign on for impeachment.
If Bush is impeached, Cheney will be president
If you push for impeaching Bush, I have just two words for you: Dick Cheney. Surely, surely you can't wish him on this country—or are you a closet admirer of our Veep? envious of his charm and affability?
o Patty Murray shares your concern.
o I am not a fan of Darth Cheney but this concern is unfounded.
o Kucinich has a resolution calling for Cheney's impeachment—House Resolution 333. It is the first step. The evidence is overwhelming that he used fraudulent evidence about Iraq. I would not have chosen to go after Cheney separately but all roads lead to Bush.
o Cheney will go first and the Republicans will select a new VP.
o And then Bush will be impeached.
Impeachment is not supported by a majority in Congress
But how in the world can you expect impeachment to take place when only 15 people have signed on to Kucinich's resolution? I mean, I don't see any grand groundswell in Congress for impeachment, no stampede to be first in line to jump on the bandwagon.
o Go back to Nixon: The Democrats had a majority—56 Senators-- in the Senate but did not have the 66 needed to vote for impeachment. There was not much support for impeachment when the hearings started. But as the evidence came out, the Republicans on the committee were persuaded—and all 20 committee members voted for articles of impeachment to go to the full House.
o No one could have predicted that then.
o And certainly no one could have predicted that Nixon would step down rather than tough it out in the House and Senate.
o And no one can predict what will happen once the evidence is on the table about Bush and Cheney.
o There is also now a resolution calling for censure for lying and spying, among other things. So, things may be moving forward in ways we cannot see yet. Censure, however, has no force.
Other presidents have violated the constitution
All right, so this president has violated the constitution. But Bush didn't invent signing statements, the term "imperial presidency" was coined long before Dubya came on the scene. Other presidents have lied to get us into war, run roughshod over people's rights. And look, torture has been going on for decades, people being spied on is nothing new.
o OK—now I know you have been talking to Rep. Smith.
o I don't care what others have done. This is like saying we cannot hold anyone accountable for murder because some people who have committed murder have gotten off.
0 The Nixon impeachment panel dealth with this issue. Here is what Elizabeth Holtzman had to say.
"This committee has firmly rejected the notion that because other Presidents may have abused their powers, the abuses of President Nixon are acceptable. We should make it clear that Presidential lying and deception, in derogation of the Constitutional powers of Congress, are intolerable... ..The sole remedy which Congress can employ to bring a President to account for usurpation of the war-making and appropriations powers is impeachment."
Elizabeth Holtzman, member of the Nixon Impeachment Panel
o Again, this is not about Bush/Cheney. It is about restoring the Constitution. I, like Barbara Jordan, refuse to sit by and watch the Constitution be destroyed.
"My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total. And I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction, of the Constitution." Statement on the Articles of Impeachment by Barbara Jordan, July 25, 1974, The House Judiciary Committee.
o At what point, do we say "enough is enough."
o Our actions define who we are as a country and a people. Are we a people who support illegal wars and occupations of other countries? Do we support torture? Do we think people should be arrested and thrown in jail without a trial? Who are we and what do we stand for?
o I stole Elizabeth de la Vega's line:
I miss the Constitution and I want it back!
Impeachment is extreme, divisive, traumatic, unsettling
Ok, so you've made the points that impeachment is doable in the available time frame, that it could actually help the Democrats pass some of their priority legislation. But the process would be traumatic and unsettling; it would divide a country that desperately needs healing, don't you think?
o Our Congressional Representatives have all repeated this Karl Rove line—he is a master of framing issues. Like any abuser, he wants the victims to fear that if they tell the truth, all hell would break loose.
o But there is nothing extreme, divisive or traumatic in standing up for justice and speaking up about what matters.
o Far from dividing us, it will heal us. Impeachment will restore our Constitution and our faith in a system of government that can check presidential abuse through a peaceful process.
"Congressional proceedings for impeachment can bring about open, fearless consideration of the most dangerous acts and threats ever committed by an American President. If courageously pursued, they can save our Constitution, the United Nations, the rule of law, the lives of countless people and leave open the possibility of peace on earth. Each of us must take a stand on impeachment now, or bear the burden of having failed to speak in this hour of maximum peril."
Ramsey Clark, January 15, 2003
Impeachment is not supported by the people of the U. S.
Well, I don't think the American people support impeachment. What evidence do you have that they'd get behind this effort? I mean, we've done street demonstrations focused on impeachment, and half a dozen people show up. Can you impeach with that kind of diffidence?
o The polls are running around 45-50% to impeach Bush if he lied about the reasons for the Iraq war, and running 50-55% for Cheney's impeachment.
o But—about 70% of self-identified Democrats support impeachment and over 60% of the independents support impeachment.
o As the impeachment process reveals more of the information about the lies and abuses of power, more people will support impeachment
The president has the inherent right to do anything necessary to fight terrorism
But look, this country was attacked on 9/11, by people whose interests go directly against ours. Is the president supposed to settle for business as usual? I think he has the inherent right to take extraordinary measures to keep the country safe.
o These is nothing in the Constitution that gives the President extraordinary authority and there was nothing in authorization for war that gave him additional powers.
o The key question that we need to answer is:
§ Does the President have the right to violate laws whenever he deems necessary?
o The Founders of this country said NO. And provided impeachment as a way to reign in an abusive President, especially in times of war. They knew that perpetual war would provide the opportunity for Presidents to become elected despots.
"A state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens."
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
"There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution. So all 'inherent powers' must derive from that Constitution."
Federal Judge, District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor
Ok, I'm convinced; now what do I do?
0 Get involved in the Process. Use Your Voice. "If not, America is going to be in for a really bad hair day."—Elle Woods, Legally Blonde II.
What you can do:
1. Tell your US Representative that you want him to sign on to HRes 333—to impeach Cheney, as a first step.
Email, call, write, meet with and get in his face at every chance to let him know your views.
Call toll free: You will speak to their staff but they will still register your views. Call often.
Toll free DC switchboard: 1-800-828-0498, 1-800-614-2803
2. Educate others: show the "How to Impeach a President" DVD and/or the "Our Constitution in Crisis" DVD—to friends, family, neighbors and the community. (see www.citizensimpeach.org to find out how to get copies)
3. Organize: to get petitions signed, to get local governments to pass Impeachment resolutions, get local political groups to support impeachment resolutions.
4. Write letters to the editor supporting impeachment.
5. Demonstrate, hold rallies, hold forums on impeachment.
6. Be ready to go back to the Washington Legislature next year if Congress does not impeach. We will once again seek an impeachment resolution from the State Legislature and this time, we know more and be better organized.
7. Stay informed. Sources can be found at our website: www.citizensimpeach.org
homepage: www.citizensimpeach.org
portland.indymedia.org/en/200...5.shtml
author: Mollie e-mail: impeachbush@riseup.net
About 45 people attended the Democrat's meeting in Aberdeen to hear arguments for and against impeachment. Here are the basic arguments that were presented.
Impeachment Objections and Rebuttals
August 2, 2007
Impeachment of Bush/Cheney is hopeless; there isn't time
So the problem I have with impeachment is that there really isn't time. It'll be a long, drawn-out affair, and by the time he's actually nailed, it'll be irrelevant
o Karl Rove Spin: if he can get us to believe that we are helpless to do anything, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy and his boy is safe.
o But the truth is that impeachment does not take long. Nixon, despite having won a landslide victory in 1972, resigned in August 1974 after 3 months of hearings by the Judiciary Committee—before the House could vote on articles of impeachment.
o Clinton—which felt like forever, took a total of 4 months—and that was not full-time work for the Congress. The House began in October 1998 but did not do much because everyone was running for reelection. They passed articles of impeachment without much debate on December 19th. The trial in the Senate lasted 21 days—and that did not consume them—there was no testimony given. They debated for three days and then voted on February 12th, 1999.
o Impeachment of Bush/Cheney will be even quicker because he has already been found guilty of illegal wiretapping and no one disputes his use of unconstitutional signing statements. The evidence for fraud to take us into Iraq is OVERWHELMING. And Rep. John Conyers has already conducted an investigation and issued a report in August 2006.
Impeachment is unnecessary, since they'll be out of office in 2009
But look, Bush and Cheney will be out of office in January, 2009. What's the big deal. Let's just let their terms run out, and they're history? I mean, the things you object to have already been done, haven't they? Why belabor them?
o I see you have been talking with Representative Adam Smith. He believes that the actions of Bush/Cheney will be repudiated in the 2008 election. Of course, this argument would have some weight if Bush and Cheney were actually running.
0 The reason impeachment matters is simply this:
Every President who follows will feel they have the authority to lie to Congress to take us into illegal wars, to spy on anyone without obtaining a warrant -disregarding the 4th amendment, arrest and jail anyone without due process and habeas corpus (5 and 6th amendments), use torture (8th amendment as well as the Geneva Conventions), and refuse to obey provisions of any law passed by Congress by using signing statements.
0 A precedent will be set if they leave office without these actions being repudiated. This will destroy the Constitution and our system of checks and balances.
0 Let me be clear—impeachment is not about whether we like Bush and Cheney, it is not about punishing them, and it is not a referendum on their policies. It is about holding them to account for their abuses of power.
Impeachment is about restoring the Constitution.
Impeachment is about restoring the rights of the citizens
Impeachment is about restoring the balance of power between three co-equal branches of government.
Impeachment would be a distraction from the important work of Congress
But why bother with impeachment, when the Democrats now have a majority in Congress, with a progressive agenda. Impeachment will simply detract from those efforts. Why not get on with the real work of stopping the war, mending the safety net, solidifying electoral gains? Wouldn't impeachment suck all the oxygen out of Congress?
o Given the braindead actions of Congress, it seems like the oxygen has already been sucked out. Their approval rating is lower than Bush's.
o But seriously--when did defending the Constitution become defined as a distraction?
o They all take an oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. That is the primary job.
o It is also a myth that all action would stop if impeachment begins. The committee that hears the evidence is composed of 20 Representatives: 10 Dems, 10 Reps. So, we are talking 20 people out of 435. It is hard to believe that Congress would come to a screeching halt because 20 Reps are looking at impeachment.
o Again—impeachment does not take long, as I just mentioned.
o While we can argue about how progressive the agenda is—clearly, Kucinich decided to support impeachment when it became clear that the majority of Democrats voted to support funding for the Iraq occupation.
o But for me, the bottom line is this: If I am not safe in my home from government spying without a warrant, if I can be arrested and jailed indefinitely without a trial—then a minimum wage that is less than Washington's is really irrelevant.
o For me, freedom and liberty trumps the so called progressive agenda.
Impeachment will endanger Democratic electoral prospects
Ok, so impeachment is important; impeachment is mandated by the constitution. But the Democrats have to think about elections; they don't have the luxury of doing impeachment.
o Politicians need to stand for something besides reelection.
o But it is also not true that they would be harmed by pursuing impeachment. The Democrats won a huge majority in the 1974 Congressional elections—they were not harmed by impeachment.
o Bush is just as unpopular as Nixon at this point.
o The Democrats may actually do worse by not standing up for impeachment—they look like cowards. And many people like myself will not support any candidate who does not have the courage to oppose the Iraq occupation and who does not sign on for impeachment.
If Bush is impeached, Cheney will be president
If you push for impeaching Bush, I have just two words for you: Dick Cheney. Surely, surely you can't wish him on this country—or are you a closet admirer of our Veep? envious of his charm and affability?
o Patty Murray shares your concern.
o I am not a fan of Darth Cheney but this concern is unfounded.
o Kucinich has a resolution calling for Cheney's impeachment—House Resolution 333. It is the first step. The evidence is overwhelming that he used fraudulent evidence about Iraq. I would not have chosen to go after Cheney separately but all roads lead to Bush.
o Cheney will go first and the Republicans will select a new VP.
o And then Bush will be impeached.
Impeachment is not supported by a majority in Congress
But how in the world can you expect impeachment to take place when only 15 people have signed on to Kucinich's resolution? I mean, I don't see any grand groundswell in Congress for impeachment, no stampede to be first in line to jump on the bandwagon.
o Go back to Nixon: The Democrats had a majority—56 Senators-- in the Senate but did not have the 66 needed to vote for impeachment. There was not much support for impeachment when the hearings started. But as the evidence came out, the Republicans on the committee were persuaded—and all 20 committee members voted for articles of impeachment to go to the full House.
o No one could have predicted that then.
o And certainly no one could have predicted that Nixon would step down rather than tough it out in the House and Senate.
o And no one can predict what will happen once the evidence is on the table about Bush and Cheney.
o There is also now a resolution calling for censure for lying and spying, among other things. So, things may be moving forward in ways we cannot see yet. Censure, however, has no force.
Other presidents have violated the constitution
All right, so this president has violated the constitution. But Bush didn't invent signing statements, the term "imperial presidency" was coined long before Dubya came on the scene. Other presidents have lied to get us into war, run roughshod over people's rights. And look, torture has been going on for decades, people being spied on is nothing new.
o OK—now I know you have been talking to Rep. Smith.
o I don't care what others have done. This is like saying we cannot hold anyone accountable for murder because some people who have committed murder have gotten off.
0 The Nixon impeachment panel dealth with this issue. Here is what Elizabeth Holtzman had to say.
"This committee has firmly rejected the notion that because other Presidents may have abused their powers, the abuses of President Nixon are acceptable. We should make it clear that Presidential lying and deception, in derogation of the Constitutional powers of Congress, are intolerable... ..The sole remedy which Congress can employ to bring a President to account for usurpation of the war-making and appropriations powers is impeachment."
Elizabeth Holtzman, member of the Nixon Impeachment Panel
o Again, this is not about Bush/Cheney. It is about restoring the Constitution. I, like Barbara Jordan, refuse to sit by and watch the Constitution be destroyed.
"My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total. And I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction, of the Constitution." Statement on the Articles of Impeachment by Barbara Jordan, July 25, 1974, The House Judiciary Committee.
o At what point, do we say "enough is enough."
o Our actions define who we are as a country and a people. Are we a people who support illegal wars and occupations of other countries? Do we support torture? Do we think people should be arrested and thrown in jail without a trial? Who are we and what do we stand for?
o I stole Elizabeth de la Vega's line:
I miss the Constitution and I want it back!
Impeachment is extreme, divisive, traumatic, unsettling
Ok, so you've made the points that impeachment is doable in the available time frame, that it could actually help the Democrats pass some of their priority legislation. But the process would be traumatic and unsettling; it would divide a country that desperately needs healing, don't you think?
o Our Congressional Representatives have all repeated this Karl Rove line—he is a master of framing issues. Like any abuser, he wants the victims to fear that if they tell the truth, all hell would break loose.
o But there is nothing extreme, divisive or traumatic in standing up for justice and speaking up about what matters.
o Far from dividing us, it will heal us. Impeachment will restore our Constitution and our faith in a system of government that can check presidential abuse through a peaceful process.
"Congressional proceedings for impeachment can bring about open, fearless consideration of the most dangerous acts and threats ever committed by an American President. If courageously pursued, they can save our Constitution, the United Nations, the rule of law, the lives of countless people and leave open the possibility of peace on earth. Each of us must take a stand on impeachment now, or bear the burden of having failed to speak in this hour of maximum peril."
Ramsey Clark, January 15, 2003
Impeachment is not supported by the people of the U. S.
Well, I don't think the American people support impeachment. What evidence do you have that they'd get behind this effort? I mean, we've done street demonstrations focused on impeachment, and half a dozen people show up. Can you impeach with that kind of diffidence?
o The polls are running around 45-50% to impeach Bush if he lied about the reasons for the Iraq war, and running 50-55% for Cheney's impeachment.
o But—about 70% of self-identified Democrats support impeachment and over 60% of the independents support impeachment.
o As the impeachment process reveals more of the information about the lies and abuses of power, more people will support impeachment
The president has the inherent right to do anything necessary to fight terrorism
But look, this country was attacked on 9/11, by people whose interests go directly against ours. Is the president supposed to settle for business as usual? I think he has the inherent right to take extraordinary measures to keep the country safe.
o These is nothing in the Constitution that gives the President extraordinary authority and there was nothing in authorization for war that gave him additional powers.
o The key question that we need to answer is:
§ Does the President have the right to violate laws whenever he deems necessary?
o The Founders of this country said NO. And provided impeachment as a way to reign in an abusive President, especially in times of war. They knew that perpetual war would provide the opportunity for Presidents to become elected despots.
"A state of war is not a blank check for the president when it comes to the rights of the nation's citizens."
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
"There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution. So all 'inherent powers' must derive from that Constitution."
Federal Judge, District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor
Ok, I'm convinced; now what do I do?
0 Get involved in the Process. Use Your Voice. "If not, America is going to be in for a really bad hair day."—Elle Woods, Legally Blonde II.
What you can do:
1. Tell your US Representative that you want him to sign on to HRes 333—to impeach Cheney, as a first step.
Email, call, write, meet with and get in his face at every chance to let him know your views.
Call toll free: You will speak to their staff but they will still register your views. Call often.
Toll free DC switchboard: 1-800-828-0498, 1-800-614-2803
2. Educate others: show the "How to Impeach a President" DVD and/or the "Our Constitution in Crisis" DVD—to friends, family, neighbors and the community. (see www.citizensimpeach.org to find out how to get copies)
3. Organize: to get petitions signed, to get local governments to pass Impeachment resolutions, get local political groups to support impeachment resolutions.
4. Write letters to the editor supporting impeachment.
5. Demonstrate, hold rallies, hold forums on impeachment.
6. Be ready to go back to the Washington Legislature next year if Congress does not impeach. We will once again seek an impeachment resolution from the State Legislature and this time, we know more and be better organized.
7. Stay informed. Sources can be found at our website: www.citizensimpeach.org
homepage: www.citizensimpeach.org
portland.indymedia.org/en/200...5.shtml
posted by:
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
