Articles of Impeachment: "You just write them on a piece of paper"

[pat_k]

http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0111.html">News Brief: McKinney Was Ready to Impeach Bush in 2001

(APN) ATLANTA -- US Rep. McKinney (D-GA) told a recent audience of the film American Blackout that she had written up Articles of Impeachment for President Bush five years ago in 2001. . .

The act of writing up Articles of Impeachment is not difficult, the Congresswoman said. "You just write them on a piece of paper," she said.

Bush and Cheney have usurped our will, terrorized us into war with the most colossal bomb threat in history (mushroom clouds over out cities in 45 minutes), committed war crimes (so ruled the stacked Supreme Court), and broken our laws (the "unitary" fig leaf for their criminal domestic surveillance program is laughable -- even Specter dismissed).

The case for impeachment is Clear, Compelling, and COMPLETE (http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Senator/10">link).

Elected bodies, good government groups, and countless ordinary citizens have enumerated the charges. The demand they are making of each and every Member of the House (Republicans included) is simple: OPEN YOUR MOUTH -- break your silence! The public has made accusations against Bush and Cheney. What are you doing about it?

If they believe the accusations are valid, do what their oath to "support and defend" demands: Accuse. As Rep. McKinney points out, writing up Articles of Impeachment is not difficult, "You just write them on a piece of paper."

Declaring their intent to do NOTHING, while refusing to address the public's accusations is NOT ACCEPTABLE.

Silence is complicity.

It does not matter what their colleagues do or don't do. Their oath is an individual oath; their duty and individual duty.

Any Member of Congress can break their own bonds of complicity by writing Articles of Impeachment on a piece of paper and introducing the resolution. They can offer their colleagues the opportunity to do the same by co-sponsoring.

Some Democrats are claiming that the leadership's continued silence and complicity is necessary -- that they must "set the stage" that they must continue to investigate and dig (never divulging what more they could possibly need, or what offenses could possibly be more egregious than those that are already proven).

Strangely, each and every one of these complicated and multistage plans comes to a common conclusion -- i.e., keep the leadership's self-imposed "impeachment is off limits" edict in place.

It reminds me of Bush v. Gore -- a conclusion (Bush must win) in search of a rationale (complex and indefensible opinion).

Any proposed plan or process or strategy that does not challenge each and every member to "go public" is a morally indefensible justification for staying on the path of complicity -- a path the Congressional leadership just "happens" to be on.

I have no doubt that if the "conclusion" changed and the leadership introduced articles of impeachment, all those rationales for silence would be dropped like hot potatoes.

[dorkulon]

1. Great pro-impeachment screed here

Bush needs to be impeached because he is a criminal of the highest order, and because tolerating criminals at the seat of power is itself a crime against the nation. The core problem in Washington today is not the president’s lack of respect for the law; it’s that congress has done nothing about it. The first step toward restoring a reasonable government is correcting that.

http://www.buffalobeast.com/110/crush_kill_destroy.htm

[pat_k]

2. Thanks for the link!

. . .Pehaps you'd like to recommend this post? (shameless self-promotion).