Home › blogs › Robert Whitlock's blog

Impeachment Articles Delivered

Tue, 06/10/2008 - 12:57pm — Robert Whitlock
Here's the text of a letter I delivered to my Congressman Brian Baird's office in Olympia, Washington this morning.

I also want to add that I requested that the Congressman's office staffer fax a copy of my cover letter along with the entire 65 pages of Impeachment Articles text to Congressman Baird (who is in D.C.). I suggest that you do the same (deliver the articles and ask that they be faxed) when you deliver your message of support for impeachment, governmental accountability and the rule of law:

Dear Congressman BairdTuesday, June 10, 2008
To: Congressman Brian Baird
US House of Representatives
Washington D.C.

From: Robert F. W. Whitlock
[redacted address]

Dear Congressman Baird,

Yesterday, on Monday June 9, 2008, your colleague, Congressman Dennis Kucinich, introduced 35 articles of impeachment for President George W. Bush. The contents of these articles are voluminous and illuminating. Cumulatively, the Kucinich Articles are a serious and well-researched indictment of the misconduct of the Bush Administration. It is critical to the health and future wellbeing of our government and society that those who have betrayed the trust of the public and committed grave acts of misconduct be held accountable to the rule of law.

Please, I humbly beseech you to sign on to Kucinich’s principled and well-intentioned legislation. Attached you will find the full text of the articles of impeachment as Representative Kucinich has prepared them. I am sure that you will find them to be comprehensive. And I urge you to follow through on this for the sake of our nation.

Thank you and sincerely,

[signed]

Robert Whitlock
[telephone # redacted]

A full text of the 35 Articles of Impeachment is available here: www. americanchronicle. com/ articles/ 64528

[June 15, 2008: Here's a set of youtube videos capturing Representative Kucinich's delivery, on the floor of the House of Representatives, of his 35 Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush:]

Comments

Tue, 06/10/2008 - 6:38pm — Laurian

I concur. Brian needs to get on board with this

I've been opposed to impeachment for reasons of practical politics but after reading the Senate Intelligence Committee report I have changed my mind. Bush needs to be impeached then he and his Junta tried in the Hague for War crimes.

My only hesitation is that an impeachment may blow back and hurt Obama's campaign.

Tue, 06/10/2008 - 9:16pm — Robert Whitlock

Impeachment

It would be too bad if impeachment was to somehow hurt the Democrats. However, impeachment is not a partisan issue, and the fact that the Democrats are worried how it will affect their elections is a truly sad statement about the state of partisan politics. Impeachment is about the rule of law. Elected officials take an oath to protect our constitution. Impeachment is their duty regardless of potential electoral consequences.

Besides, the argument that a united and principled front on impeachment is what is necessary. Worry about how it will affect is moot. The first thing is to do what is right and uphold the law.

Wed, 06/11/2008 - 6:11am — Laurian

Impeachment IS a Partisan issue

Why do you think articles of impeachment are brought by the House of Representatives and tried in the Senate. The impeachment of Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were nothing but politics. Impeachment is about punishing your political enemies after they really piss you off, not justice. It's important not to be confused on this.

You should care how impeachment will affect the elections. If handled correctly an impeachment trial could help Obama and other down ticket Dems by airing the High crimes and Misdemeanors of the criminal enterprise called the Bush administration. If handled badly it probably gives gives McCain two Supreme Court appointments, a gift that will keep on giving.

Wed, 06/11/2008 - 10:51am — Robert Whitlock

Impeachment, Partisan Politics and the Rule of Law

Laurian, I don't follow. I don't see why the fact that the House of Representatives indicts and the Senate convicts - makes impeachment into a necessarily partisan issue.

Those who make claim that impeachment is partisan are what (and whom) make it partisan. Really, impeachment, if it is just and true, should not be partisan at all - it should be, quite simply and purely, about maintaining the rule of law and exercising accountability for those who break laws (in this case, members of the Bush Admin. who have lied and misled about the war - along with a litany of other offenses {link above}).

Wed, 06/11/2008 - 11:23am — Guglielmo

I think it's because

the House and Senate are political bodies. There is no getting around that. Justice is "blind," politics is pragmatic. Compromizes are made. In this case it's preserving some form of reason on the supreme court, fixing healthcare, wise energy policy, addressing climate change, and really leaving no child behind vs. kicking George Bush out of his office a few months earlier.
Wed, 06/11/2008 - 8:57pm — Laurian

Impeachment should be about maintaining the rule of law

but it never has been and there is no reason to believe that would change if Congress chooses to impeach these war criminals. Beyond that, 2/3rds of the Senate will not vote to convict Shrub et. al. Why? Partisan politics. QED.
Wed, 06/11/2008 - 9:21pm — Robert Whitlock

Partisan Politics

If Congress can't maintain the rule of law, then it is right to ask whether or not the partisan political system working? I don't think so.

Our government is defunct. It's not representing the people. It's representing and colluding with mega-corporations.

Wed, 06/11/2008 - 10:54am — JstPlnOnry

Doing My Best Homer Simpson Impression

smacking my forhead & cringing...

"DOH!"

not this AGAIN.

Thu, 06/12/2008 - 9:42am — The Fire Inside

AP: "House waves off

AP: "House waves off impeachment measure against Bush":

By 251-166, House members dispatched the measure to a committee on Wednesday — a procedure often used to kill legislation.

Here are the alleged "treason, bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors":

Kucinich's articles also charge Bush with failing to provide troops with vehicle armor

Poor planning is not a crime.

illegally detaining both foreign nationals and Americans

How our judicial system - and elected representatives - has any jurisdiction over foreign nationals in a combat zone outside of U.S. borders is beyond me. Illegally detaining American citizens, however, is within the scope of Congress to examine.

condoning torture

See above.

mishandling the government's response to Hurricane Katrina

I'm not seeing "incompetence" listed anywhere...

and undermining efforts to address global warning.

Um...what?

So then I went over to the "35 Articles of Impeachment":

Invading Iraq Absent a Declaration of War.

I cannot emphasize this enough. I. Write. From. South Korea. Fifty-Five. Years. After. The. Shooting. Stopped. There. Was. No. Declaration. Of. War.

Establishment of Permanent U.S. Military Bases in Iraq

Sigh. See above.

Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources

Yikes! Someone better start drawing up the papers for every president from Washington to...oh, wait.

Reckless Misspending and Waste of U.S. Tax Dollars in Connection With Iraq and US Contractors

I don't necessarily disagree with this, but don't a lot of politicians qualify for impeachment under "reckless misspending and waste of U.S. tax dollars?"

Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act

This type of grievance is well-within the scope of impeachment.

There are a few items which I have no problem with a politician bringing forward for public debate.

And for the record, I fall into the camp who believes impeachment is for little more than political payback. It's an option which should be on the table, but in my short lifetime I haven't seen it used/considered for anything it appears to be intended for.

Thu, 06/12/2008 - 10:22am — Rob Richards

You've only seen it used once in your life.

Only two presidents have ever been impeached, Andrew Johnson, and Clinton, and both cases were purely political. Ironic, I think, that this time there are actually some offenses worth impeachment, and probably some war crimes too, and politics is stopping it from happening. Thanks Democrats, you rock!

image
Sun, 06/15/2008 - 8:18pm — Mike

The only time I saw impeachment approached in a meaningful way

was the case of Richard Nixon who resigned to avoid impeachment.  There was no question at the point of resignation that serious, non-partisan articles of impeachment were likely to pass.  The crimes were essentially abuse of power, wiretapping, coverups etc. 

Impeachment is key to the balance of power in our government of three branches who each have an  important role to play.  One of the critical roles of Congress is to impeach a President who engages in high crimes and misdemeanors, whatever that means.  Mr. Bush, like Mr. Nixon before, has acted in a manner that should lead to a serious investigation similar to the one that Nixon faced.  

It's more essential than partisan.  

Thu, 06/12/2008 - 10:26am — Rick

Impeachment is for...

"...high crimes and misdemeanors..." and it is essentially a political process, not a legal one. So, whether something is a crime really doesn't cut one way or the other. More to the point is whether the President has committed what could be termed malfeasance of office, which is kind of ironic because the root meaning of "malfeasance" is "to do evil," or to be an "evil-doer" -- exactly the word that Bush used to describe terrorists.


Beware the terrible simplifiers.
Jacob Burckhardt
Thu, 06/12/2008 - 10:30am — security_six

If

 Bush truly commited crimes (and I'm not saying one way or another...) mebbe a judge of a competent US Court should request a grand jury indicte him.

 

 

Thu, 06/12/2008 - 11:19am — Guglielmo

There's this separation of powers thing

The constitution only allows one way for the president to be "arrested." It's impeachment.
Thu, 06/12/2008 - 6:59pm — JT

This is why Kucinich

has no business being the President. This is a huge waste of time and Dennis should be dealing with some of the real problems that will have an effect on this country.

"A dog is not 'almost human', and I know of no greater insult to the canine race than to describe it as such." - John Holmes

itchyhitch.blogspot.com

Thu, 06/12/2008 - 7:03pm — Robert Whitlock

Law Enforcement

It is interesting that you think the enforcement of the rule of law is a waste of time.

There is evidence of grievous wrongdoing - including malfeasance. For Congress not to conduct a thorough investigation of the allegations in the Kucinich Articles would be malfeasance (or nonfeasance) in itself.

This is supposed to be a nation of laws - not of men. It is the duty of Congress to uphold those laws. When Congress fails to hold an apparently criminal executive office accountable, to whom does the responsibility fall?

Sun, 06/15/2008 - 3:27pm — Robert Whitlock

YouTube video Delivery of Articles of Impeachment

The delivery, by Congressman Dennis Kucinich, of 35 Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.