The Bush Administration , the False Statement Statute, and Impeachment
(This is a revision of my earlier post. I felt it necessary after finding errors in grammar.)There are some who have charged that even if it was proven that the Bush administration lied to get us into Iraq, there are no legal consequences for him or other administration officials for having done so. Furthermore, those very same individuals are given to claiming that we all knew that the intelligence was being fixed, so what difference do the Downing Street minutes make? Their reasoning is that – despite Bush’s State of the Union addresses in 2002 and 2003 – he did not knowingly mislead the United States Congress and it’s citizens. They would even go so far as to tell you that it was a result of the “bad intelligence” received from the CIA and FBI that led him and other administration officials to make false statements to Congress and the American people. In their minds, in their warped reality, the Bush administration is therefore not guilty, and even if they had lied there is no legal grounds for prosecution.
They could not be more wrong. I am here to tell you today that there are laws that makes it a crime for any member of the legislative, judicial, or executive branch of our government to give false statements or commit fraud! There are United States laws that make it possible to hold Bush and his administration accountable for their having mislead the American people and Congress. Before I site the specific laws, allow me to list some of the lies of the Bush administration. Some of the top ten lies are as follows (Source:
http://www.alternet.org/story/16274 ):
LIE #1: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." -- President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.
FACT: This story, leaked to and breathlessly reported by Judith Miller in the New York Times, has turned out to be complete baloney. Department of Energy officials, who monitor nuclear plants, say the tubes could not be used for enriching uranium. One intelligence analyst, who was part of the tubes investigation, angrily told The New Republic: "You had senior American officials like Condoleezza Rice saying the only use of this aluminum really is uranium centrifuges. She said that on television. And that's just a lie."
LIE #2: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." -- President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.
FACT: This whopper was based on a document that the White House already knew to be a forgery thanks to the CIA. Sold to Italian intelligence by some hustler, the document carried the signature of an official who had been out of office for 10 years and referenced a constitution that was no longer in effect. The ex-ambassador who the CIA sent to check out the story is pissed: "They knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie," he told the New Republic, anonymously. "They were unpersuasive about aluminum tubes and added this to make their case more strongly."
LIE #3: "We believe has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." -- Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."
FACT: There was and is absolutely zero basis for this statement. CIA reports up through 2002 showed no evidence of an Iraqi nuclear weapons program.
LIE #4: " solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." -- CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening's speech by President Bush.
FACT: Intelligence agencies knew of tentative contacts between Saddam and al-Qaeda in the early '90s, but found no proof of a continuing relationship. In other words, by tweaking language, Tenet and Bush spun the intelligence180 degrees to say exactly the opposite of what it suggested.
LIE #5: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." -- President Bush, Oct. 7.
FACT: No evidence of this has ever been leaked or produced. Colin Powell told the U.N. this alleged training took place in a camp in northern Iraq. To his great embarrassment, the area he indicated was later revealed to be outside Iraq's control and patrolled by Allied war planes.
LIE #6: "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs for missions targeting the United States." -- President Bush, Oct. 7.
FACT: Said drones can't fly more than 300 miles, and Iraq is 6,000 miles from the U.S. coastline. Furthermore, Iraq's drone-building program wasn't much more advanced than your average model plane enthusiast. And isn't a "manned aerial vehicle" just a scary way to say "plane"?
LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." -- President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.
FACT: Despite a massive nationwide search by U.S. and British forces, there are no signs, traces or examples of chemical weapons being deployed in the field, or anywhere else during the war.
LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." -- Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.
FACT: Putting aside the glaring fact that not one drop of this massive stockpile has been found, as previously reported on AlterNet the United States' own intelligence reports show that these stocks -- if they existed -- were well past their use-by date and therefore useless as weapon fodder.
LIE #9: "We know where are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." -- Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.
FACT: Needless to say, no such weapons were found, not to the east, west, south or north, somewhat or otherwise.
LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." -- President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.
FACT: This was reference to the discovery of two modified truck trailers that the CIA claimed were potential mobile biological weapons lab. But British and American experts -- including the State Department's intelligence wing in a report released this week -- have since declared this to be untrue. According to the British, and much to Prime Minister Tony Blair's embarrassment, the trailers are actually exactly what Iraq said they were; facilities to fill weather balloons, sold to them by the British themselves.
As mentioned earlier, there are laws that directly prohibit members of the judicial, legislative, or executive branches from lying. The law is covered under United States Codes. Specifically, the law relates to both fraud and false statements. United States Code, Title 18, Section 1001 (a.k.a., the False Statements Statute), reads as follows (Source:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ts_search.pl?titl... ):
Section 1001. Statements or entries generally(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any
matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or
judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly
and willfully -
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or
device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the
same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent
statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5
years, or both.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial
proceeding, or that party's counsel, for statements,
representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or
counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the
legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to -
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a
matter related to the procurement of property or services,
personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a
document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to
the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative
branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the
authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of
the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or
Senate.
Why does this matter? If it matters, why is it that this issue has not come up before? I believe that this matters because of the recent revelations concerning the Downing Street minutes. In the past when people have charged that this administration LIED to the American people, there was supposedly no concrete evidence to back up their statements. This has been trumpeted despite many, many hours of lies caught on video tape. However, the DSM(s) are the official minutes of British meetings from the office of Tony Blair. Furthermore, they are connected with British intelligence, and in light of recent Deep Throat revelations this carries even more weight.
Why should we be concerned with this code specifically? The code sited above is important because it sites a MISDEMEANOR and due to the deaths of our service men and women in this illegal war, one could conclude that the lies also constitute HIGH CRIMES. Dare I say, TREASON? Why is this important? Let us look at Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution for that answer (Source:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article... ):
Article II, Section 4. The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Based upon United States Code, Title 18, Section 1001, and Article II, Section 4, of the United States Constitution, George W. Bush and his administration have clearly committed misdemeanors. I would even go so far as to say that they have committed high crimes and – yes! – TREASON due to the rising death tolls in Iraq of both U.S. service members and Iraqis.
As of this writing, 1714 of our service members have died, and an estimated 14,000 or more have been disabled for life. An unknown excessive number of Iraqis have died as a result of this administration’s lies. It is not the numbers that matter when it comes to morality, for morality cannot be weighed based upon such things. The fact that anyone – be they American soldier or Iraqi – had to die because of lies is an inexcusable and grievous offense. It is a stain upon the reputation of this once good nation of hope and democracy and freedom. Every time that someone else dies in Iraq our reputation is further damaged.
Today (16 June 2005) the honorable Representative John Conyers, of Michigan, shall hold a forum on the Downing Street Minutes. It is my most ardent belief that Mr. Conyers and company know that the only way this president and his administration can be held accountable is if there is irrefutable proof that they mislead this nation’s Congress and citizens.
There is a lot of gravity in the memo, but what is most egregious are the words, “the facts were being fixed around the policy.” Let me say it again – THE FACTS WERE BEING FIXED AROUND THE POLICY. This should become the rallying cry of all who truly value what it meant to be American, what it meant to live in the land of the free and the home of the brave. This should become the rallying cry of all those who truly support the troops, not by pretentious flag waving, but through their words and actions.
We see it in commercials all the time – Support the troops. We see it on bumper stickers – Support the troops. We hear it on the radio – Support the troops. What does that really mean? When people point out the lies and fallacies of this administration they are told by some that they’re against the troops. Nothing could be further from the truth. George W. Bush and his administration are not the troops, and they must not be allowed to be representative of what it means to be American. If one is truly for supporting the troops, then the lies of this administration must be directly and vehemently confronted. Supporting the troops does not mean that you agree with the arrogant words and actions of the Bush administration. Supporting the troops is taking a stand against the lies, the manipulation of intelligence information, and the continued fantasy world that the Neo-Conservatives in government have constructed. The very sad and real reality is that our troops in Iraq have died for lies, and nothing could be more unforgivable from their Commander in Chief.
If this is not a case for impeachment, then there never was one in the U.S. history. This president and his administration have lied to the American people (to include Congress) again-and-again. They must be held accountable for their actions and made to answer to the law if we are to redeem our national pride and international reputation.
If we fail, if we allow the Neo-Con and the naysayer, to keep us down, then we are just as complacent as the German citizens in World War II who claimed they knew nothing or atrocities or were simply following orders. In this age of information, no one has any reason to remain ignorant of the actions of their government. We have it within our power – as is evidenced by the 540,000+ signatures to Representative John Conyers letter to Bush. Friends, we must continue forward and overcome the obstacles in our path. Bush and his executioners must be held accountable. Pray, we are not willing accomplices through inaction and silence. Pray we do not becoming silent and willing executioners. We must achieve redemption, less we be complacent in crimes against humanity.
We have the necessary tools of the law at our disposal, but the question is: Have we the strength to wield them against the beast?
Impeach.
Indict.
Imprison.
S&F 
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
