Impeach the Little Bastard - Because people deserve to know the truth
November 22, 2008
by Bryan Zepp Jamieson
Republicans have abused the power of the Presidential pardon since Gerald Ford used it to preemptively pardon the criminal Richard Nixon. It was argued that Americans, with their delicate sensitivities, weren’t mature enough to cope with the idea that an elected official might face a fair and public trial for crimes he may have committed or had committed while in office.
If the JFK assassination undermined American innocence (and Gerald Ford tried to spin fairy tales about that, too), then the Nixon pardon undermined American confidence in themselves as a place where justice could be served.
Lightning struck again some 18 years later, when George Bush used the power of the pardon to kick apart the case being pursued against the criminal Ronald Reagan, and in which some scummy little felons and traitors such as Oliver North and G. Gordon Liddy got to run free and sneer loudly at the country that gave them their undeserved liberty.
Losing in Vietnam didn’t do nearly as much damage to American self-respect as the sight of G. Gordon Liddy braying into his radio microphone that people should shoot federal agents in the head as a way of demonstrating their Liddy-style patriotism.
A lot of people watched this, and watched right wingers openly gloating over it, and wondered what the fuck had gone wrong with America.
And then, for the next eight years, the same vicious and amoral clowns who guffawed over the sight of Nixon lazing in the California sun and tried to make a tin hero out of the moronic Reagan, tried to destroy the Clinton presidency by impeaching him over trivia.
Now, we have a crowd that makes the Nixon scummies and the Reagan sleazers look like pikers. For the past eight years, we’ve seen the most criminal and anti-American administration in history. They haven’t settled for third rate burglaries and selling arms to terrorists, no. They stole an election to get in, and then proceeded to spend years looting the national treasury, lied the country into a war whose real aim was to abet in that looting, let terrorists attack the country, refused a serious investigation into it, and used it to pass measures that slashed the rights of Americans while politicizing the judicial branch of the government, and attempted to establish one-party rule, supported by a corrupted judiciary and a crooked voting system.
And while they were at it, they committed war crimes, and gave America the same reputation the old Soviet Union used to have, of torture and unjust imprisonments without trial and secret prison camps.
They robbed the country blind, and humiliated and debased it in the process. They didn’t govern America; they didn’t even rule it. They simply raped it.
And now, mercifully, the reign of these vicious, anti-American little Republican scumbags is coming to an end.
But will any of them ever pay for their crimes? Trillions of dollars have gone missing from the common weal, either sunk into wars for profit, siphoned off to the undeserving rich, or evaporated in the implosion of a capitalist bubble that was given all the internal air pressure it wanted. Three thousand people died in 9/11, and another 5,000 Americans have died in Afghanistan and Iraq. We’ll probably never know how many died in Iraq just for living there, or how many were herded off to American gulags to die of torture, or spend years wondering if they would ever get a trial, let alone ever be set free. Elections were suborned, and Clinton was hardly the only public servant to be attacked by the Republican slime-and-destroy machine, now in the paws of the nation’s district attorneys. At least one governor was framed and sent to jail. In today’s paper, there was a story of a indictment of Dick Cheney and Alberto Gonzales in which the judge, another corrupt, bent Republican stooge, actually tried to dismiss the charges before they were legally filed.
What the fuck is wrong with America, you ask? It got taken over by corrupt, amoral Republican crooks, and nobody has the balls to make them pay for their crimes. And now, they are just clinging on, hoping that the entire country won’t collapse before the mess is foisted off on President-elect Obama, and trying like hell to blame him for the situation they created.
And while they are doing that, they are waiting for Putsch’s preemptive pardons, the ones that ensure that they will never have to face their responsibility for the millions of lives lost and the trillions of dollars squandered or stolen. They’ll never have to stand in open court and explain why they insisted Saddam had nukes when he didn’t, or why NORAD was ordered to stand down on the morning of 9/11, or why Governor Siegleman was sent to jail, or why Putsch suddenly fired all those Federal attorneys and replaced them with ones willing to investigate Democratic candidates for office.
The Republicans, who laughingly describe themselves as the party of personal responsibility, desperately need those presidential pardons issued preemptively so they can skate, never pay a dime, and crow that if they were criminals, why weren’t they ever put on trial?
If that doesn’t sicken you, then you are morally bankrupt or worse, a Republican.
That’s why it is so important that impeachment proceedings be started now in the Democratic House of Representatives against George W. Bush. He won’t actually be impeached in the 58 days remaining before he leaves office, making an impeachment moot. There isn’t time.
But the Constitution, the one which grants Presidents the power to pardon, has one exception: A president may pardon, “except in cases of impeachment.” As I read it, it means that not only may a president not pardon any high public officials who are facing impeachment, but it means that a president who is facing the impeachment process may not use it in any way that could undermine the process against himself.
Putsch will abuse it and use it to take himself and his cronies off the hook. Don’t doubt that for an instant.
And don’t doubt that it will be another emotional and moral body blow to Americans, who had just regained a little self-respect and a lot of hope from electing Obama and throwing off the Republican reign of sleaze.
It isn’t just a matter of vindictiveness against Putsch, although personally I would be delighted if he spent the rest of his natural life rotting away in a jail cell. It’s because America, which has always prided itself on justice, and avenging wrongs, has faced terrible injustice and wrongs for the past eight years, and needs the opportunity to address it through rule of law, in open court, and by the standards of the civilized world.
Don’t let Putsch get away with his crimes. Impeach the little bastard now, and make him eventually face a jury to explain himself.
Comments
25 Comments »
-
Bob's Bail Out Plan by bobl-tlm
-
How Do You Like Deregulation Now? graphic politics by Dicky Neely
This wonderful article should be required reading for all Americans.
I would like to emphasize that commencing impeachment is not enough. After he, and others are found guilty they simply must be imprisoned and fined commensurate their crimes…..the basis of which might be the United States hung Saddam for less. This is a must if America is ever going to regain some of it’s lost honour and respect in the world.
Good to see you on this bandwagon Zepp. I’ve been doing my thing calling for the impeachment of this scumbag since he was illegally installed in the office of the presidency. I was beginning to think that you & everyone else was tired of my ‘noise’!
I still say these worms were behind 9-11. They didn’t just let it happen. They planned it & participated in it, in addition to all that you mention. They are criminals of the lowest order and I do not understand how this entire Congress stood by and allowed the criminal acts to continue.
My guess is that they were being blackmailed with information that Cheney & his gang of thugs gathered from the illegal telephone & email interception. Which of course leads us to ask what the hell members of Congress were doing that allowed them to be so easily blackmailed.
You’re damned tooting this impeachment process needs to get underway and it needs to be done soon. It needs to continue until that slimeball and his crew have departed town on January 20th.
I am going to fax, email, snail mail, etc., this commentary to as many people as I can.
I hope that President elect Obama has the courage to not pardon even one of these thieving, lying, murdering thugs.
It never ceases to amaze me.
Those advocating for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are great at hurling accusations but have no evidence to back up the charges they seek against Bush and Cheney.
I guess this is a result of too much time on the internet reading conspiracy websites, I don’t know. In any event, its just not as simple as making allegations. You have to have proof, evidence of criminal wrongdoing.
So- what’s the proof of Bush/Cheney’s involvement in 9/11? What’s the irrefutable evidence? If you’ve got it, publish it here. We’ll be happy to share it with the world. Did Bush “lie” us into wars with Iraq and Afghanistan? The weapons of mass destruction were one among many reasons given for the war. And it hardly matters- in September 2001, Congress authorized President Bush “to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons . . . .” Read that sentence carefully. It doesn’t say the president needed to offer proof of involvement- only what whom he determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the attacks.
This is why Democrats in Congress have chosen to stay away from impeachment. To do so, they would have to answer for their own complicity in the wars being fought in Iraq and Afghanistan.
As for not pardoning people for torture, this is also moot. President Bush has already signed an executive order which protects himself and the executive branch in general from being prosecuted for war crimes under American law for the torture at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, and anywhere else American intelligence and military have engaged in same. The question will be if President-elect Obama seeks to rescind that order. Pardon my cynicism, but he probably won’t.
Please…. PLEASE… go to a public law seminar or better yet, law school before you start acting an authority on impeachment charges. You and your readers will be much better off for the attendance.
Larry, there is ample evidence to call for an impeachment of George W. Bush, including one you just cited: misuse of signing statements. They were never intended to exempt the president or his staff from the law.
And what makes you think I want to protect the Democrats? If they are complicit (and some are) then let’s show it!
Finally, the whole point of the impeachment is to stop Putsch from preemptively pardoning and eliminating any possibility of finding out what really happened.
If Americans ever want to regain their self respect, they must stop thinking of chief administrators as Mawsters who must always be protected at all costs.
In all my years of rants, pleadings and hand wringing I have never thought about including 9/11 events in my calls for the impeachment of Bush and Chaney. While I do believe the so called Truth Commission was anything but truthful and competent the case for impeachment is so overwhelming, to muck up the case with 9/11 accusations would be counterproductive with the dubious likelihood of dragging the process on for years. eddie
Eddie old boy, no one is trying to muck up anything by mentioning 9-11. We are talking about crimes against the Constitution of the U.S. We are talking about war crimes.
We are talking about this jerk who has been acting like he’s god of the world. His public admissions of lies is enough to impeach the SOB & prevent him from pardoning that entire rotten administration of his. That’s what we are talking about.
The hell with 9-11. If we can impeach a legally elected president for having and lying about a private, consensual, sexual affair, we can damn sure impeach an illegally installed SOB for lying & manufacturing stories to forward his agenda & for destroying a country in the process.
We don’t have to look at every single thing that this moron and his gang of thugs have done. We need to stop his pardoning of all the criminals, including himself. Just starting the impeachment process will put a stop to that. The crimes and who should be charged & prosecuted can happen later.
A thousand signing statements placing himself above the law? The brazen, in your face lies? Torture? Crapping all over the Constitution? None of this is enough Sakin?
….signed an executive order which protects himself and the executive branch in general from being prosecuted for war crimes? Bullschitt! Who the hell died and appointed Bush/Cheney god?
Hell, that alone declares his guilt and rubs your nose in it! He has been the prosecutor, jury & judge.
This bastard has been acting like a dictator and getting away with it. This country is not supposed to have a dictator. Impeach the SOB and send him to the Hague for war crimes prosecution!
Hell, this jerk could be impeached & removed from office in a matter of hours for his crimes against the Constitution if we had a Congress that gave a damn about the rules of law.
This administration has been 8 years of fffing crimes. He has operated his damn term like a maffia boss. Almost 5000 U.S. soldiers are dead, another 20,000+ wounded, sick or maimed for the lies this bastard told. Probably more than a million Iraqi people dead. Heaven only knows how many wounded, maimed or ill. Millions have lost their homes. This SOB attack another country that had never been any threat to us and has bombed it into a sand pile.
If high crimes and misdemeanors doesn’t cover the atrocities committed by this SOB and his VP, what the hell does? Have you lost your friggin’ mind?
I agree with Larry on this matter.
And, on my own I add the following. If ranting, venting, dissing, and self-referenced conspiracy theorizing–peppered with epithets and four-letter words– were all that is needed, then I’m sure that the OTHER GUYS would have won a long time ago, and most of us would have joined Antonio Gramsci in writing notebooks in prison. We can’t “win” by out-swearing them–or otherwise out-venting them. We can’t “win” out-armwrestling them over which side is more deserving of the title, “We the People”. We can only hope to get things moving in what seems to us a better direction by out-thinking them, out- organizing them, and, in time, out-reaching (to) them.
I work hard on my essays, and i’m sure everyone else does, too. But if we’re ever going to lift this journal to the level that Norla’s efforts merit, we’ll have to lift the level of what we say and how we say it.
Every day I start off thinking with Uncle Charlie: “The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.” To me, that means thinking systematically about the very practical things people do in this world–a world characterized by “circumstances [not] chosen by them, but [...] directly encountered, given, and transmitted from the past”; circumstances which i would characterize further, using Habermas’s phrase, “always already”, as “always already systematically asymmetrical distributions of power and resources”. Just stringing together that complex run of words is enough to make ME want to shout–but i resist the urge, because my experiences have convinced me that shouting does NOT help.
In closing this “pep talk”, I say let’s go out there and out-think, out-organize, and out-work them, and outright out write them! I’m happy writing for and working with Norla, but i’m willing to move elsewhere if other writers tell me that my views are the ones that are out of step or style.
Robert, please feel free to be as courteous as you wish. Nobody is stopping you.
In the meantime, I’ve been writing for Norla for almost four years now, and if she feels I’ve lowered her standards, I’m sure she would have phased me out at some point along the line.
Zepp–I understand your long-time involvement with Norla, and i honor it. I just found my Meuse–or rather, she found my Meuse–relatively recently.
My comments went to our collective effectiveness, not to her (or your) standards. I hoped that my quoting Marx would make that evident.
bob
Zepp-
Two things mentioned in your response leads me to believe you need more study on this issue.
First, there is a difference between an executive order, which has the effect of law, and a signing statement, which is an opinion offered by the president about aspects of legislation that affect the executive branch of government. In the latter, the president can write “this or that provision doesn’t apply” but signing statements in and of themselves are legal.
The question we should be asking is: is there any evidence that such signing statements led to departments within the executive branch not following the law? As of yet, no such evidence has been presented.
Second, if Congress gives authorization to the executive for use of force, they are giving him/her legal sanction. We do not have the option to “impeach” Congress- no Constitutional provision allows for that. To suggest the president committed high crimes and misdemeanors regarding the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan when legal sanction was given is to be ignorant of how our Constitution works.
Lastly, Maggie- I appreciate your passion, but President Clinton was not impeached for having a consensual affair. He was impeached because when asked about the affair in a court of law, he perjured himself by saying no such liaison occurred. Perjury is a felony, and certainly falls under the rubric of high crimes and misdemeanors.
I’m sorry, Maggie- I wasn’t able to address your comment to me earlier. Wasn’t able to see who it was from.
Signing statements do not have the effect of law. They are only opinions on legislation offered by the president as to the effect of that legislation upon the executive branch. President Bush could no more excuse himself from the law with a signing statement than either you or I could.
What Bush did was sign an executive order, which does have the effect of law, granting the executive branch immunity from prosecution of possible war crimes under American law. This does not preclude Bush and others from prosecution in an international court. I appreciate that you don’t like that Bush can sign an executive order exempting himself and others from prosecution. In order to change this, you would need to ask Congress for a Constitutional amendment banning the president from creating executive orders. It’s unlikely they would attempt such a move.
The caveat here is that executive orders can be rescinded by a new executive. So we will have to wait and see if President-elect Obama rescinds this order. It’s my contention he won’t.
I also appreciate that you’re angry over the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, since Bush was given authorization by Congress with no accountability, the target for your anger should be them. Attempting to impeach Bush for the wars when he had Congressional authority would make Congress look awfully foolish.
Larry, I believe one could dismiss everything concerning 9/11 and the illegal invasion/occupation of Iraq and there would still be a boxcar of damning evidence which would earn impeachment convictions in any just court in the land. eddie
Okay, Eddie. Please present such evidence.
Yeah- that’s what I thought.
Anybody who thinks Bu$h hasn’t wrecked the country isn’t paying attention.
Anybody who doesn’t think he broke the law while doing so is naive.
Anybody who thinks he shouldn’t be held accountable is foolish.
The only Constitutional limit on Presidential pardons pertains to impeachment.
WTF are we waiting for?
The only Constitutional limit on Presidential pardons pertains to impeachment.WTF are we waiting for?……….Thomas Finnell
That’s the question I have been asking for several years now and especially now, near the end of this reign of terror by Bush and cronies.
All they have to do is get the impeachment process under way…. they can let it drag until January 21! We need to stop that pardon pen.
My friend Tim tried to post a comment and got,
“The link has been “disabled for my safety” ;~) Imagine that?”
Any way this is what he tried to post:
But here’s why I want them Tried, Convicted and Hung: In a land of LAW ya shouldn’t be allowed to get away with breaking those LAWS just by saying you don’t recognize the LAW. AND if the Dems don’t pursue this corruption in some manner, THEY become as corrupt as the others. PLUS the people of this Nation NEED to be told/shown WHAT our LAWS are & how they work.
Tim
Maggie- I can’t say for sure why Tim received the message he did, although it might have something to do with Gnarly’s post. In any event, I absolutely agree with Tim. What I’ve been asking for is evidence over accusation. The same goes for you, Thomas. You can call me all the names you want, but without evidence, you’ll never be able to get an indictment.
So where’s the evidence? Eddie says there’s a boxcar full, yet what I keep reading are accusations.
Larry
Larry, you ask, “So where’s the evidence? Eddie says there’s a boxcar full, yet what I keep reading are accusations.” There is the fact that the invasion of Iraq was categorically illegal, and the reasons given for the attack have all proven to be false on the face of it. Over a million Iraqis are dead, along with some 4,500 Americans. It has cost trillions, and sullied America’s image and standing throughout the world. And for what? We STILL don’t know why Bush felt he had to attack Iraq.
Lying the country into a messy occupation, and committing atrocities while there, would be prima facie reasons for impeachment.
But I noted in my essay, and will repeat here that I have no expectation or desire to see an impeachment succeed. That there isn’t time should be obvious. But if it is on the floor of the House and receiving active House attention, Bush may not pardon. They means his options for preventing the REAL courts from judging his administration are limited.
Larry, you are just being a schitthead! The Constitution says that these jackasses can be impeached and removed from office for High crimes & misdemeanors.
Lying & starting an illegal war is damn sure not a misdemeanor but if you want to call it that, fine, just impeach the bastard and get the show on the road.
Bush has been acting like a tin pot dictator, making his own damn laws and only a few people have tried to stop him. Dennis Kucinich has listed 35 items for impeachment if I remember correctly.
Vincent Bugloisi has made an excellent case for trying that worm for murder. Bush/Cheney have murdered almost 5000 U.S. soldiers with their illegal war and wounded another 20-25 thousand that they admit to. The war dead number may be higher too, as it has been said that it doesn’t count unless they die on the battle field.
What kind of crimes do these bastards have to commit to meet your standards for impeachment?
People have been sent to their deaths in the US justice system for lesser crimes.
Maggie- I’ve already addressed the issue of the Iraq War, but will repeat myself once again.
The Bush Administration was given was given authority for use of force by Congress in September of 2001. In that authority, Congress did not ask for irrefutable proof that nations or people were involved with the planning and execution of the WTC attack. It gave the executive discretion to use force against any person or nation the president determined was involved.
In other words, you want Congress to impeach Bush because he did what they told him he could do.
The law is science, Maggie, and cases are made by creating legal theory and applying evidence to prove the theory. Vincent Bugliosi has one theory- Elizabeth de la Vega has another and Elizabeth Holtzmann has yet another. But legal theory does not substitute for evidence. Without evidence, theory has no standing. The same holds true for Dennis Kucinich. While he crafted an interesting document filled with allegations, again, the proof was lacking.
It’s not a matter of what kind of crimes the Bush Adminstration have to commit to meet my standards for impeachment. Until the evidence of those crimes can meet legal standards, the alleged crimes are only that- alleged- which I’ve said time and time again.
I ask you, Maggie. If a prosecutor was trying to make a case against you for an indictment, wouldn’t you want the prosecutor to have evidence that backed the theory of your alleged crime? Because that’s the slippery slope we’re entering into.
Larry
Actually, the Congress merely authorized Bush to use any action he deemed necessary, up to and including force, in dealing with Saddam. The agreement was based on false evidence, and included the promise that Bush would receive sanction from the Security Council of the United Nations before employing direct force against Iraq, as is required by treaty and international law. Bush simply blew off the Security Council when it became clear that not only were France and Russia going to veto, but that he didn’t even have a majority among the 15 nations.
This discussion reminded me of the wisdom of a feminist friend who told me: “You can’t win by using the Master’s tools.” To which i would add that using the Master’s tools on each other doesn’t make sense to me at all. As i wrote earlier, and I reiterate again here in reaction to discussion since i first wrote it, “If ranting, venting, dissing, and self-referenced conspiracy theorizing -– peppered with epithets and four-letter words -– were all that is needed, then I’m sure that the OTHER GUYS would have won a long time ago, and most of us would have joined Antonio Gramsci in writing notebooks in prison.” This is about being effective; not about being nice.
What about all the other matters that sensible people could argue — just as sensibly as people arguing here doubtlessly see themselves as arguing — merited attention too, or even instead of the subject that has drawn now 23 comments? Personally, i wrote my best effort on the two pieces on the auto sector currently up. I would greatly appreciate your directing some of your energies toward reactioning to what i wrote there.
Bob-
This is a discussion that’s been going on long before We! Magazine came upon the scene. While your articles on the auto industry are certainly worthy of comment, this is a very important issue. Our justice system is based on the idea of evidence supporting theory. As an academic and scientist, I’m sure you agree.
Those of us who have carried this discussion forward often agree to disagree until someone pulls off the scab and starts the bloodletting again. Such is the case with so many disagreements, as I’m sure you know.
Larry — It’s the imputations, and the tone that they are expressed that upset me. No because they aren’t genteel, but because they chase people away — and that makes such arguments less likely to be effective. Not everyone who disagrees with me is an idiot. I’ve engaged in my shre of foundational and philosophical arguments and disagreements–it’s just that very few of them have been R-rated. Oh,and there’s nothing special about my auto industry essays;; I was mostly trying to change the subject.
Thanks for writing to me.
bob letcher