Three Paths to the Impeachment of Bush and Cheney....

[whistle]

There are at least three pathways to Cheney's rapid removal from office.

First, President Bush could conclude—under prodding from his father and other "Bush 41" allies—that Cheney is the biggest obstacle to a Presidential legacy. Bush Sr., White House political advisor Karl Rove, and other Bush family loyalists are deeply upset that, as of this moment, George W. Bush will go down in history as one of the worst American Presidents to ever hold office. With less than two years left in his Presidency, Bush is going to have to take drastic remedial action to create even a modest legacy. On Dec. 31, 2006, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote a series of ten recommendations to the President on how to create a viable legacy. He urged Bush not only to embrace the Baker-Hamilton recommendations, but also to fire Dick Cheney right away, because Cheney was a magnet for hatred of his Administration, and only by removing him from office and replacing him with a more popular and competent Vice President could Bush hope to win back some public support.

Second, the U.S. Congress can prioritize oversight hearings that get at the crimes of Cheney. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has already prepared a report, itemizing 23 separate felony crimes committed by Cheney and Bush, in their first six years in office. Now that Democrats hold a majority in both the House and the Senate, the committees can subpoena witnesses and documents that were hidden for the past six years. Among the Cheney crimes already under probe are the fabrication of pre-war intelligence, to convince Congress to authorize the use of force against Iraq; violations of the U.S. Constitution by spying on American citizens; violations of the Geneva Conventions that ban torture of prisoners; and lying to Congress about his ties to Halliburton, the corporation he once headed, which has received tens of billions of dollars in government contracts.

Third, Independent Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald can nail Cheney, for his role in the leaking of classified information about CIA agents to journalists. Fitzgerald was appointed in December 2003 to investigate which top White House officials were responsible for leaking the identity of CIA undercover officer Valerie Plame Wilson, wife of former Amb. Joseph Wilson. It is a Federal crime to identify an undercover CIA officer, and Cheney's former chief of staff, Lewis Libby, is now on trial for his role in that crime. Libby is charged with lying to a Federal grand jury. His lawyers have announced that they plan to call Dick Cheney as a defense witness, and this will afford Fitzgerald a unique opportunity to interrogate the Vice President, under oath, about his role in the Plame Wilson leak. If Cheney's role in that crime is revealed publicly, there will be a groundswell demand for his removal from office.

<impeachment proposals by Jeffery Steinburg>

http://www.larouchepub.com/eirtoc/2007/eirtoc_3404.html

[HereSince1628]

1. Sorry but I think we are stuck with 1 path.

I feel bad arguing with whacky LaRoucher notions, but,

Even with a strong President, an elected Constitutional Officer just isn't one of those positions for which the pResident could make a firing, although pressure could be brought to bear for a resignation. But, this isn't one of those times. Cheney is arguably STRONGER than the shrub. Quite unlikely he'll be fired.


If Fitzgerald had the goods on Cheney, he'd already be indicted. It seems quite unlikely that Judge Walton will be letting things get so far off track that anything related to Cheney would reveal as yet unknown culpability.

And even if he did, it's still up to the House to pass articles of impeachment.

[MonkeyFunk]

3. I agree

especially with the notion that the Libby trial will "lead" somewhere unexpected. That's not how trials work. Investigations lead places, and Fitzgerald has already conducted his investigation.

I think people are expecting some great Perry Mason moment with Cheney on the stand where he cracks up and admits "Yeah, I did it! And I'd do it again! Muhahahaha!"

That's not going to happen. Fitzgerald is good enough to know the answer to every question he asks.

[porphyrian]

2. There are a lot of slow balls in the air. - n/t

[Luckyduck]

4. Illegal wiretapping is all we need.

Bush admitted it. Case closed. Remember Nixon?

[pat_k]

5. Yes. That, or War crimes (already adjudicated)

As you point out, we just need ONE impeachable offense to remove. If the Senate acquits on the first charges sent up, they just send up the next, and the next, and the next. . .

Spying on us and putting torture "on the table," and thus making it fair game for opposition forces to torture Americans, constitute the most irrefutable articles of impeachment. We know they terrorized us into a criminal war of aggression, but Bush and Cheney can claim that they believed their own BS. Better to go with charges for which there is NO defense.

Important Note

We must recognize that, while we have proof beyond reasonable doubt of violations of law, impeachment is NOT a legal process. It is a political process. We could impeach for stupidity. All that's required is the political will. If they are too cowardly to tell the truths that can redeem the nation by accusing them of dictating torture, maybe they'd go for making the case that their wrong-headed stupidity and irrational stubborness and arrogance poses an intolerable threat to our constitutional democracy and therefore mandates impeachment.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=160&topic_id=24657&mesg_id=24662

. . .
Impeachment has been a moral imperative for years.

Bush and Cheney demonstrate their willful intent to nullify the Constitution when they assert the fascist fantasy of a "unitary authoritarian executive" that can break the law at its whim.

In their attack on the Constitution, Bush and Cheney are blatantly committing grave violations of law that go far beyond impeachable. They have committed crimes that are subject to the penalty of death. Namely, war crimes under U.S. Code (Title 18 section 2441) and international law and the Anti-Terrorism Act (Title 18, Section 844 paragraph e. Bomb Threat -- "mushroom clouds in 45 min").

In addition, they violate the sanctity of our civil rights with their criminal spying operation (Title 50, Section 1805).

From http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Senator/10"> Rationalizing for Inaction on Impeachment:

. . .charges have already been investigated and even adjudicated. They have admitted violating FISA -- and have tried to "defend" it (mutually exclusively) by claiming inherent authority and congressional approval. GOP Senator Specter himself has already scoffed at the defense.

The (formerly) Supreme Court has already ruled in Hamdan that Geneva applies to Gitmo. Behind the Euphemedia smokescreen of tribunal tinkering lies the reality of the decision: Three Years of War Crimes had already been committed. Similarly, the lies about WMD that terrorized the nation into war are already "old news." There is no fig leaf left.

[Luckyduck]

6. kick

:kick: