Republicans Join Impeachment Movement

This is how it will be: one small step at a time, just like any other journey. Don't be discouraged! Despite all the obstacles, we're still here and can still get this done!
Impeachment Begins: Be on Capitol Hill on Friday July 25th Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2008-07-17 01:03
At 10 a.m. on Friday July 25th, the House Judiciary Committee will hold a preliminary hearing [my bold] on the topic of impeachment, with a presentation by Congressman Dennis Kucinich. This is not yet a true impeachment hearing, but it is our opportunity to push for one, and it represents a tremendous victory after years of effort by millions of Americans who want to keep the Constitution alive. This never would have happened without your hard work. And we can't let up now!
The National Impeachment Network is organizing a rally and asking everyone who can to take a day off for justice and meet at 9 a.m. on Friday July 25th in front of the Rayburn House Office Building on the Independence Avenue side. Bring impeachment shirts and posters! For more information contact ningroup@gmail.com
NOTE: The hearing itself will be in Rayburn Room 2141 at 10 a.m. If you want to get in, you'd be wise to get in line VERY early.
Between now and Friday the 25th, please take these steps:
Contact your member of Congress in support of impeachment.
Ask the media to cover the hearing.
Sign the petition at Congressman Kucinich's website.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/hearingday
And here's VERY good news from the other side of the aisle. Perhaps there really are some republicans amongst the majority repuglicans, true citizens who put America first and party second.9 Republicans Vote for Impeachment Hearings, 10 Abstain
July 19th, 2008
In a stunning development which fell with the silence of a feather yesterday, 9 Republicans broke with their iron-fisted party to put country first, and voted to send Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s article of impeachment HR 1345 to the Judiciary, where Chairman John Conyers will hold a hearings on abuses of power by the Bush administration, according to the Congressional Quaterly’s CQToday. Ten Republicans abstained in this critical moment, while only 5 Dems did. The vote was neck and neck at many moments, with “Nays” pulling ahead twice.
Those Republicans are (Yea 238 - Nay 180):
Congressman Kevin Brady (TX)
Congressman Wayne Gilchrest (MD)
Congressman Walter B. Jones (NC)
Representative Don Manzullo (IL)
U.S. Congressman Tim Murphy(PA)
Congressman Ron Paul (TX)
Congressman Dave Reichert (WA)
Congressman Christopher Shays (CT)
Representative Mike Turner (OH)
One of the Republicans, Walter Jones, represents Camp LeJeune in North Carolina, one of the largest Marine bases in the country, and one which has borne heavily the sacrifice of the Iraq War.[...]
http://nationalimpeachment.org/

Veterans for Peace Back Up Congressman Kuchnich: They Have Their Own Impeachment Petition

What a perfect opportunity for a combination punch! Let's help the Vets get into the People's House to meet with Congressman John Conyers. The Vets' impeachment petition is below, along with information about their next convention. There will be a tribute to David Cline and other Vets who have been freed from this life.
Congressman Dennis Kucinich Introduced 35 Articles of Impeachment Against President Bush on Monday Night
Submitted by david swanson on Tue, 2008-06-10
TUESDAY EVENING: The Clerk of the House is expected to read the articles of impeachment, which should take about 5 hours, at the conclusion of which Rep. Kucinich will make a motion. Watch C-Span! http://c-span.org
Rep. Robert Wexler is the first to cosponsor and will be on Keith Olbermann today.
CALL THE MEDIA!
Email Your Congress Member - Congress has 72 hours to table it, send it to committee, pass it, or reject it.
The full text of the articles is available at:
http://chun.afterdowningstreet.org/amomentoftruth.pdf
Extensive documentation to accompany each article will be posted later today. Watch these websites:
http://kucinich.us
http://democrats.com
http://afterdowningstreet.org
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/bush
Veterans for Peace members have been trying to meet with Representative John Conyers to deliver an Impeachment petition.
Wednesday, June 11, members of Veterans For Peace will be delivering 22,000 signatures demanding impeachment of President George Bush to Representative John Conyers' office. Representative Conyers, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, has refused to meet with the members of VFP for the past two months. Upon arriving at Representative Conyers' office, members from New York, North Carolina, New Jersey, Ohio and the District of Columbia have decided to conduct a sit-in until he agrees to meet with them.
In light of Congressman Dennis Kucinich putting forth 35 Articles for Impeachment and reading those Articles on the floor of the House of Representatives last night, 6-09-08...
YOU CAN HELP VFP
Call Representative Conyers (202-225-5126), ask that he meet with members of Veterans For Peace and accept the 22,000 signatures that call for the Impeachment of the President.
View the Press Release here - PDF
Read VFP's Case for Impeachment - PDF
This Country needs the Accountibility called for in our Constitution and must Act for the sake of Country and that Constitution and Right the Wrongs Committed 'In Our Names'!
http://imagineaworldof.blogspot.com/2008/06/tell-rep-conyers-to-meet-with-veterans.html#li nks
Tell the world: My America Doesn't Torture!
Convention Updates The convention is only 11 weeks away. Have you reserved your room yet? Convention registration is $200 and available online. Below are some updates and special events happening that weekend
Special Seminar on Justice for Victims of Agent Orange - Join us on Wednesday, August 27 for this half day seminar
Travel by Rail - Several VFP members are encouraging people to travel to the Convention by Amtrak.
Tributes - There will be tributes to David Cline and other VFP members who have passed this year.
Roommate - Are you looking to share a room at the Convention?

Mukasey's 9/11 Lies

Following up on Glenn Greenwald's request for readers to follow up and "generate the attention for this story that it requires", I hereby join Mr. Greenwald and call for an immediate investigation of Mukasey, Ashcroft, all of BushCo and their entire lying 9/11 scenario. These 4 posts from Glenn's blog on Salon.com should catch your interest.
Michael Mukasey's tearful lies
Michael Mukasey has conclusively proven himself to be an exact replica of Alberto Gonzales -- slavishly loyal to every presidential whim and unbound by even the most minimal constraints of truth while serving those whims.[...]
[...] These are multiple falsehoods here, and independently, this whole claim makes no sense. There is also a pretty startling new revelation here about the Bush administration's pre-9/11 failure that requires a good amount of attention.
[...] Independently, even if there had been a warrant requirement for that call -- and there unquestionably was not -- why didn't the Bush administration obtain a FISA warrantknew about but didn't intercept really amounts to one of the most potent indictments yet about the Bush administration's failure to detect the plot in action. Contrary to his false claims, FISA -- for multiple reasons -- did not prevent eavesdropping on that call.
[...] to listen in on 9/11-planning calls from this "safe house"? Independently, why didn't the administration invoke FISA's 72-hour emergency warrantless window to listen in on those calls? If what Muskasey said this week is true -- and that's a big "if" -- his revelation about this Afghan call that the administration Independently, even if there had been a warrant requirement for that call -- and there unquestionably was not -- why didn't the Bush administration obtain a FISA warrantknew about but didn't intercept really amounts to one of the most potent indictments yet about the Bush administration's failure to detect the plot in action. Contrary to his false claims, FISA -- for multiple reasons -- did not prevent eavesdropping on that call.
[...] to listen in on 9/11-planning calls from this "safe house"? Independently, why didn't the administration invoke FISA's 72-hour emergency warrantless window to listen in on those calls? If what Muskasey said this week is true -- and that's a big "if" -- his revelation about this Afghan call that the administration Michael Mukasey can cry all he wants about the 9/11 attacks. But neither he nor the rest of the Bush administration are the proprietors of those attacks. There were millions of New Yorkers in Manhattan on 9/11 other than Michael Mukasey, who lived and worked there for a long time. Neither Mike Mukasey nor his tearful pleas for unchecked government surveillance power and the erosion of the rule of law are representative of them.
To the contrary, the substantial majority of New Yorkers -- and huge majorities of Manhattanites -- vehemently reject the Bush/Cheney agenda of dismantling our constitutional framework and basic safeguards in the name of these sorts of fear-mongering and manipulative appeals. Unlike Mukasey and other Bush followers, most New Yorkers have ceased quivering in fear long ago -- if they ever did -- and have had their resolve to defend our basic constitutional liberties strengthened, not obliterated, as a result of the 9/11 attack and the subsequent, self-serving exploitation of it by Mukasey's White House bosses. And under no circumstances do Mukasey's tears provide license for this tidal wave of lies in defense of presidential lawlessness, from our nation's highest "law enforcement officer." [...]
Thursday April 3, 2008 07:04 EDT
Why doesn't the 9/11 Commission know about Mukasey's 9/11 story?
(Updated below with response from Philip Zelikow -
Update II – Last week, during a question-and-answer session following a speech he delivered in San Francisco, Attorney General Michael Mukasey revealed a startling and extremely newsworthy fact. As I wrote last Saturday, Mukasey claimed that, prior to 9/11, the Bush administration was aware of a telephone call being made by an Al Qaeda Terrorist from what he called a "safe house in Afghanistan" into the U.S., but failed to eavesdrop on that call. Some help is needed from readers here to generate the attention for this story that it requires.[...]
The San Francisco Chronicle reported on the Mukasey speech and is asking some of the right questions:
Update III - With the help of readers, I was able to find and get in contact with Tom Kean's office, who asked that an email be sent to him requesting comment. The email I sent is here, along with the email I sent to the DOJ (at their request) asking for comment from Mukasey. [...]
Update IV -Chairman Conyers demands answers from Mukasey - House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, along with two Subcommittee Chairs, just sent a letter to Michael Mukasey demanding answers to all the right questions about his 9/11 claims as well as the bizarre (though unsurprising) reference in the Yoo Memorandum to the suspension of the Fourth Amendment inside the U.S. That letter will need to be followed up with action, but it's a good start.
UPDATE V: The DOJ replies to my email referenced above, here.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/03/29/mukasey/index.htm

Impeachment Begins the Path to Justice

We have so much work to do but must not despair. On this 40th anniversary of the death for Dr. Martin Luther King, his courage and commitment must inform every action, every day. Each little step forward has a ripple effect, pushes unknown others to action they might not have attempted. And my mantra for today: act in kindness and with compassion for those who cannot understand.

Conyers Threatens Impeachment if Iran Attacked
Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2008-04-03 18:52. By David Swanson
Coming out of today's meeting with John Conyers, these seem to be the significant developments:
He is circulating a letter among his colleageus for signatures, a letter addressed to Bush letting him know that an attack on Iran will result in impeachment hearings. LET'S ASK EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS TO SIGN ON! I know it seems bassackwards and we want impeachment before a new war, not after, but this is a way for us to show Conyers the support that will be there any time he moves forward.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/

Push Impeachment Down Their Throats

Conyers Says He's on Edge of Starting Impeachment
By David Swanson
On Thursday, Chairman John Conyers' House Judiciary Committee held a hearing at which Attorney General Michael Mukasey said that he would not investigate torture (video) or warrantless spying (video), he would not enforce contempt citations (video), and he would treat Justice Department opinions as providing immunity for crimes (report).
[...] Following the hearing, he and two staffers met for an hour and 15 minutes with two members of Code Pink to discuss impeachment.
Conyers expressed fear of what might happen following an impeachment, fear of installing a Bush replacement or losing an election. The "corporate power structure", he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing "blowback." Conyers told Ellen Taylor and Manijeh Saba: "You need to be more than brave and courageous. You need to be smart."
[...] The Chairman told Taylor and Saba that he is listening to several advocates for impeachment, including Liz Holtzman and this author, and asked "So how would it look if I allowed two women to push me over the edge?" Conyers leaned out of his chair for dramatic effect.

Push Conyers Over the Edge
Only impeachment hearings:

1. will make it on TV

2. will force compliance with subpoenas by eliminating "executive privilege",

3. will hold brazen criminals accountable, and

4. will convince voters that Democrats care about the Constitution.
Call 202-225-5126, Fax 202-225-0072
Email john.conyers@mail.house.gov
For more info: http://wexlerwantshearings.com
[...] the people Conyers is really listening to are too smart for their own good but lacking a bit in the bravery and courage area. Their wise strategy places the outcome of elections ahead of preserving the democracy in which those elections are held or even the verifiability of those elections. And, on their own terms, they are probably wrong. Nothing (except perhaps hand-counted paper ballots) would benefit the Democrats in the next election more than a real fight to stand up for justice. If Congress chooses to cede all power to the White House and move to the back of the bus, Conyers' legacy will not be what it might have been.
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/30858

We Demand Impeachment

Our congressman, Jerrold Nadler has usually been supportive of progressive, human rights causes and advocated research into illnesses caused by the toxic air after 9/11. You might think he'd be at the forefront of holding the Bush administration accountable for the crimes perpetuated in America, Afghanistan, Iraq and the world, but read David Swanson's report:
Nadler Is Blocking Impeachment
http://www.democrats.com/node/15492
[...] Wednesday's meeting was handicapped, of course, because no-one says aloud what the reasons are for opposing impeachment. That Cheney and Bush have committed impeachable offenses is universally understood. But the arguments against impeaching them (other priorities,
bipartisanship, we don't have the votes, etc.) usually sound like lame cover for whatever the real reason is. I suspect the real reason is built into Nadler's plan of wasting a year in order to pass bills next year. He assumes that in 2009 there will be either a better Congress or a better president (he backs Hillary Clinton), or both.
Sadly, history says otherwise. For 230 years, the party that brings impeachment wins, and the party that fails to do so when it's called for loses. Conyers was there when the Democrats moved to impeach Nixon and then won big. He was there when they refused to impeach Reagan and then lost. And most of the current committee was there when the Republicans impeached Clinton against the will of the public for a non-impeachable offense and still won both houses of Congress and the White House.
[...] [Robert] Wexler proposed opening impeachment hearings on Cheney. Conyers committee staffer Perry Appelbaum laid out instead a schedule for non-impeachment hearings over the coming 11 months. Conyers' notion is to hold non-impeachment hearings on "the imperial presidency" and run out the clock .[...]
[...] Wednesday's meeting was handicapped, of course, because no-one says aloud what the reasons are for opposing imp eachment. That Cheney and Bush have committed impeachable offenses is universally understood. But the arguments against impeaching them (other priorities, bipartisanship, we don't have the votes, etc.) usually sound like lame cover for whatever the real reason is. I suspect the real reason is built into Nadler's plan of wasting a year in order to pass bills next year. He assumes that in 2009 there will be either a better Congress or a better president (he backs Hillary C linton), or both.
Sadly, history says otherwise. For 230 years, the party that brings impeachment wins, [my bold] and the party th at fails to do so when it's called for loses. Conyers was there when the
Democrats moved to impeach Nixon and then won big. He was there when they refused to impeach Reagan and then lost. And most of the current committee was there when the Republicans impeached Clinton against the will of the public for a non-impeachable offense and still won both houses of Co ngress and the White H ouse.

http://asknadler2impeach.org/

Phone for Impeachment

Wednesday, January 16, 2008, National Call-In Day

Congressman Robert Wexler is organizing his colleagues to ask House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers to begin Cheney impeachment hearings. Wexler is asking his fellow Judiciary Committee Members to co-sign a letter to Conyers. We support Wexler in this, and we are also asking congress members not on the committee to send their own letters to Conyers. Please Email your Congress Member here: http://www.democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/125