Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Impeach’ Category

If the Republicans ever manage to retake Congress, they will absolutely try to impeach President Obama. And it’ll be based upon a supremely ridiculous charge such as, say, the president refusing to nourish our crops with a sports drink instead of water.

Okay, so maybe the Idiocracy example is over-the-top, but if we follow the current trajectory of far-right attacks to their logical yet insane conclusion, it makes sense in a very eerie way. Have you seen the television commercials solemnly defending our right to poison our kids with “juice drinks and soda?” There you go.

I’ve been following the Republican descent into the realms of the bizarre for some time now, and it wasn’t until the “czars” thing broke that I became convinced that if they retook Congress the Republicans might try to impeach the president. The grounds for both the impeachment and the language used to sell it will likely be fabricated by either Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh.

I mean, 100 Republican members of Congress have signed onto Rep. Jack Kingston’s cartoonish czar bill. 100 House Republicans out of 177 have attached their names to a bill that was essentially invented as a television bit by Glenn Beck without any regard for the fact that “czar” is a nickname invented by the press, and that every president — all of them! — has employed policy and political advisers within their administrations. But it functions as an effective Beck attack because he knows his audience isn’t bright enough to distinguish “czars” from “communists.” By the way, not to be out-crazied by his House colleagues, Senator Ensign introduced an amendment to the Finance Committee health care reform bill called “Transparency in Czars.” This might as well be “Transparency in Hobbits” because it’s just that ludicrous.

Nevertheless, there’s a growing conventional wisdom in the press alleging that both sides of the political spectrum are equally guilty of wackaloon attacks and conspiracy theories.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Thanks to vdoevidence911 on Youtube this video is still around. He posted it on Sept 13, 2006. The original CNN video was from August 9, 2006, about the time that Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton came out with their book Without Precedent and was later posted on Youtube. Lou Dobbs quoted this book in his video. I posted the video on my blog on August 12, 2006, but the video was promptly removed from Youtube. I found a transcript on CNN, so copied it and posted it on August 16, 2006 along with a link to it.

Anyways, thanks to vdoevidence911 on Youtube the video has been on there since September 2006, but under another name. Googling “Lou Dobbs Wakes Up to 9/11 Lies” there are 25 articles or so with the same dead video on them, so I guess i wasn’t alone in not being able to find it.

Update: metacafe has posted the video

Read Full Post »

Senate Votes To Remove Blagojevich From Office, 59-0

CHRISTOPHER WILLS | January 29, 2009 08:14 PM EST | AP

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — Gov. Rod Blagojevich was thrown out of office Thursday without a single lawmaker rising in his defense, ending a nearly two-month crisis that erupted with his arrest on charges he tried to sell Barack Obama’s vacant Senate seat.

Blagojevich becomes the first U.S. governor in more than 20 years to be removed by impeachment.

After a four-day trial, the Illinois Senate voted 59-0 to convict him of abuse of power, automatically ousting the second-term Democrat. In a second, identical vote, lawmakers further barred Blagojevich from ever holding public office in the state again.

“He failed the test of character. He is beneath the dignity of the state of Illinois. He is no longer worthy to be our governor,” said Sen. Matt Murphy, a Republican from suburban Chicago.

Blagojevich’s troubles are not over. Federal prosecutors are drawing up an indictment against him on corruption charges.

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Obama Leaves Door Open To Investigating Bush, But Wants To “Look Forward”

Huffington Post- Sam Stein

January 11, 2009 11:10 AM

Responding to the most popular inquiry on the “Open for Questions” feature of his website, Barack Obama said on Sunday that he is “evaluating” whether or not to investigate potential crimes of the Bush administration, but that he was inclined to “look forward as opposed to looking backwards.”

The answer was delivered during an interview to This Week With George Stephanopoulos. But the question itself has been weeks in the work.

The Obama transition team, as part of its efforts to open up the political process, had allowed web users to vote on questions for the incoming administration to field. To the top rose a query from Bob Fertik, president of Democrats.com and a former Clinton White House technology official, asking whether the incoming administration would appoint a special prosecutor to “independently investigate the greatest crimes of the Bush administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping.”

On Obama’s website, a December statement from Vice President-elect Joe Biden on the topic was offered as a response (similar older statements were used to address several other national security-related questions, which the transition team has avoided discussing). But Stephanopoulos made the matter moot by posing the question directly to the president-elect.

“We’re still evaluating how we’re going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth,” said Obama. “And obviously we’re going to look at past practices. And I don’t believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards. And part of my job is to make sure that for example at the CIA, you’ve got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don’t want them to suddenly feel like they’ve got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering up.”

Pressed a bit — was he ruling out prosecution? — the president-elect suggested that decision would be that of his attorney general.

“I think my general view when it comes to my attorney general is that he’s the people’s lawyer. Eric Holder’s been nominated,” said Obama. “His job is to uphold the Constitution and look after the interests of the American people, not be swayed by my day-to-day politics. So ultimately, he’s going to be making some calls. But my general belief is that when it comes to national security, what we have to focus on is getting things right in the future as opposed to looking at what we got wrong in the past.”

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Conyers On Prosecuting Bush Team: “Stay Tuned”

January 9, 2009 10:08 AM

Huffington Post- Sam Stein

Rep. John Conyers, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is still invested in prosecuting members of the Bush administration once they leave office.

In an interview on the “Bill Press Show” Friday, the Michigan Democrat floated the notion that the Bush team’s illegal wiretapping, torture, detention, and other practices could land some members in an international tribunal.

“I don’t want to get too speculative on that, because it’s still under review,” said Conyers on the radio show. “Now, remember, violation of the federal criminal code doesn’t end because you leave office. If a crime has been committed and there seems to be reasonable evidence that it did get committed, there’s nothing for a person to be prosecuted… Leaving office doesn’t free you up from what you may have done wrong … Anyone that leaves office, including [the] President … there’s the World Court … They have tribunals … This thing is not over with. As they say: Stay tuned.”

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Jan 9, 11:36 AM EST

Associated Press- Illinois House impeaches Gov. Rod Blagojevich

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) — The Illinois House has voted to impeach Gov. Rod Blagojevich (bluh-GOY’-uh-vich), an unprecedented step in state history.

The action sets the stage for a Senate trial on whether he should be thrown out of office for corruption and abuse of power.

House members found evidence that the two-term Democrat had abused his power, including improperly spending tax money, adopting programs without legislative approval and violating state hiring laws. He’s denied wrongdoing.

MORE HERE

Read Full Post »

Cheney: Bush’s actions legal if not impeached

Raw Story- Andrew McLemore
Published: Sunday January 4, 2009

If you don’t get punished, you didn’t go anything wrong, right?

That’s the message Vice President Dick Cheney gave in an interview with CBS‘ Bob Schieffer on Sunday, suggesting that a president’s actions are legal if those actions didn’t result in his impeachment.

Asked by Schieffer if he believed that anything the president does in time of war is legal, Cheney said there is “historic precedent of taking action that you wouldn’t take in peacetime.”

MORE HERE

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Read Full Post »

Blagojevich Could Be Impeached Next Week

Via: Huffington Post/ Associated Press |   January 2, 2009 01:41 PM

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich could be impeached as early as next week.

The Illinois House has changed its schedule and will meet several days next week.

A spokesman for House Speaker Michael Madigan says the chamber may vote on a recommendation from the special committee studying whether Blagojevich should be impeached.

It would take a simple majority vote for the House to impeach — which basically means accusing him of misconduct.

Then the state Senate would hold a trial to determine if the governor is guilty. A conviction there requires a two-thirds majority.

Blagojevich was arrested last month on federal corruption charges.

Read Full Post »

Sudhan @16:45 CET

by Marisa Taylor | McClatchy Newspapers, Dec 19, 2008

WASHINGTON – Emboldened by a Democratic win of the White House, civil libertarians and human rights groups want the incoming Obama administration to investigate whether the Bush administration committed war crimes. They don’t just want low-level CIA interrogators, either. They want President George W. Bush on down.

[CONFESSED WAR CRIMINAL DICK CHENEY  "It is mind boggling to say eight years later that there is not going to be some sort of criminal accountability for what happened," said David Glazier, a law of war expert at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and a retired naval officer. "It certainly undermines our moral authority and our ability to criticize other countries for doing exactly the same thing. But given the legal issues and the political reality, I am hard pressed to see any other outcome."]CONFESSED WAR CRIMINAL DICK CHENEY “It is mind boggling to say eight years later that there is not going to be some sort of criminal accountability for what happened,” said David Glazier, a law of war expert at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and a retired naval officer. “It certainly undermines our moral authority and our ability to criticize other countries for doing exactly the same thing. But given the legal issues and the political reality, I am hard pressed to see any other outcome.”


In the past eight years, administration critics have demanded that top officials be held accountable for a host of expansive assertions of executive powers from eavesdropping without warrants to detaining suspected enemy combatants indefinitely at the Guantanamo Bay military prison. A recent bipartisan Senate report on how Bush policies led to the abuse of detainees has fueled calls for a criminal investigation.

But even some who believe top officials broke the law don’t favor criminal prosecutions. The charges would be too difficult legally and politically to succeed.

Without wider support, the campaign to haul top administration officials before an American court is likely to stall.

In the end, Bush administration critics might have more success by digging out the truth about what happened and who was responsible, rather than assigning criminal liability, and letting the court of public opinion issue the verdicts, many say.

“It is mind boggling to say eight years later that there is not going to be some sort of criminal accountability for what happened,” said David Glazier, a law of war expert at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and a retired naval officer. “It certainly undermines our moral authority and our ability to criticize other countries for doing exactly the same thing. But given the legal issues and the political reality, I am hard pressed to see any other outcome.”

Robert Turner, a former Reagan White House lawyer who supported several of the Bush administration’s assertions of executive powers, but not the use of harsh interrogation techniques, said that war crimes “may well have been committed,” given reports by human-rights organizations that some prisoners may have been beaten to death.

Turner was outraged when Bush signed an executive order in 2007 that he believes permitted highly abusive treatment, so long as the “purpose” was to acquire intelligence to stop future terrorist attacks, rather than just to humiliate or degrade the detainee.

He recalls telling senior Justice Department officials during a conference call prior to the public release of the order: “Do you people understand that you are setting up the president of the United States to be tried as a war criminal?” The conference call, he said, quickly came to an end.

Turner, who co-founded the University of Virginia’s Center for National Security Law in 1981, rebuts the administration’s defense that waterboarding, which simulates the sensation of drowning, isn’t torture and therefore is legal.

He also challenges the administration’s argument that Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, prohibiting inhumane treatment of detainees, isn’t binding. “The standard is not torture. It’s humane treatment. That’s a much higher standard,” he said, noting that after World War II, the U.S. prosecuted Japanese soldiers for using waterboarding on American troops.

Continued >>


Read Full Post »

Doomed to Collapse?

By tmartin • December 17, 2008

In his latest column Ron Paul warns of dire consequences if we do not get back on a sustainable economic course in this country.

Economic Freedom or Socialist Intervention?

by Ron Paul

The freedom to fail is an essential part of freedom. Government-provided financial security necessitates relinquishing the very essence of freedom. Last week, the big 3 American automakers came back to Capitol Hill with their hands out to the government. Congress spent this past week debating how much money to give them and what strings should be attached. Though the bailout plan for the auto industry has suffered what I would call a temporary setback in the Senate, other avenues for public funding are being explored through the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department. I am afraid the American auto industry will soon learn that having billions rain down from Washington will not be the blessing one might expect.

The government, after it subsidizes an industry, tends to become a very demanding benefactor. Politicians may not have any real idea about how to build a car, run a bank, educate a child, heal the sick or build a road, but they are quite adept at using carrots and sticks to manipulate and threaten those who do. Most of the federal control over education, roads, healthcare, and now banking and soon auto manufacturing, is done through money, mandates and conditions. The bailout proposal we were considering would force automobile manufacturers to submit their business plans for the approval of a new federal “car czar.” This bureaucrat would have the authority to approve the automakers’ restructuring plan, monitor implementation of the plan, and even stop certain transactions he determines are inconsistent with the companies’ long-term viability.

One could argue that if billions of taxpayer dollars are going to flow into a failing industry, then representatives of those taxpayers have “bought” a say in how that industry is run – which is precisely why bailouts are such a bad idea for both the industry and the taxpayers. The federal government has neither the competence nor the Constitutional authority to tell private companies, such as automakers, how to run their businesses. I would have thought that failed experiments with central planning and government control of business that caused so much harm in the last century would have taught my colleagues the folly of making businesses obey politicians and bureaucrats instead of heeding the wishes of consumers, employees, and stockholders. But the auto industry is in danger of learning for themselves one of the oldest lessons in politics: he who pays the fiddler calls the tune.

It is not the job of government to sustain business. The government should get out of the way, and instead examine excessive regulations, tax policy and red tape that have been hostile to manufacturing in this country. We should get back on a sustainable economic course in this country, or we are doomed to collapse, as the Soviets did, under the crushing burden of big government and a strangled economy that can no longer pay for it.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: