Pulitzer Prize-Winning History Prof's Op/Ed: Americans Should Fight For Impeachment of Bush & Cheney

[Hissyspit]

http://www.pressconnects.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070506/OPINION/705060321/1005/OPINION

Sunday May 6, 2007
GUEST VIEWPOINT
Americans should fight for impeachment of Bush, Cheney

By Herbert P. Bix
For the past six years the Bush/Cheney administration has set aside all standards of international law and morality regarding the use of force. On issues of the utmost public importance they have governed by lies, misstatements, and omissions of facts. Their campaign of deceit, amplified by the U.S. corporate media, helped to take a frightened American public into two illegal wars in violation of the UN Charter and the Constitution. Since then, their policies have spread violence and strife throughout the world, making the United States an object of unprecedented global hated.

- snip -

For these "high crimes and misdemeanors" more and more Americans are now demanding their removal from office. Two-thirds of the nation has seen in President Bush's last, incoherent State of the Union address, and his tactic of escalating the war in Iraq, that he will not set a deadline for a withdrawal of all troops, bases, and mercenary contractors from Iraq. Bush is clearly unwilling, perhaps even incapable of reversing course and ending his misconceived "war on terror." Disgusted and angry with this administration of rightwing ideologues and unindicted lawbreakers, the American people have every reason to want their representatives in Congress to end the Bush-era and the Bush wars. But until Election Day, they lack the power to make them do so.

The leading presidential candidates are committed to sustaining U.S. global dominance and, at this moment in our crisis of constitutional government, have no use for those who demand that the House begin impeachment investigations. These career politicians see nothing to gain for themselves by upholding the Constitution, or passing laws that would actually cut off funding for the lost war in Iraq. Surely this is all the more reason why we-the-people must step up our demand that Congress gauge correctly where unchecked executive power is leading the nation. We need to begin the constitutional procedure of drawing up articles of indictment of the president and vice president, voting on those articles in the House, then trying them in the Senate. If two-thirds of the Senators agree, Bush and Cheney can indeed be convicted; their term will end; and they will be removed from office and become subject to criminal indictment.

- snip -

Despite these realities, impeachment can succeed even in failing, for it is as much a political maneuver as a constitutional "tool." An impeachment process that is constantly propelled from below carries within itself the potential to advance a democratic agenda that goes beyond the circumstances that brought it about. One of its positive effects would be to weaken the dangerously expanded powers of the executive branch. The very attempt to try Bush and Cheney might also help Americans to envision a saner role for themselves in the world, and to have that role reflected in a foreign policy that locks in respect for international law as well as respect for universal norms regarding the treatment of any captives in war.

Herbert P. Bix of Vestal is a professor of history at Binghamton University. His biography "Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan" received the Pulitzer Prize in 2001.

[L. Coyote]

1. R: To the Top with you. HOW MANY DEATHS can this STOP? IMPEACH NOW.

The death toll caused by the Bush/Cheney deceits mount each day. NO DELAY.

New Bumper Sticker Needed: Impeach them ASAP.

[WHAT]

8. IASAP?...

Impeach As Soon As Possible!

I like it

[ms liberty]

2. K&R - great piece, thanks for posting! n/t

[Ghost in the Machine]

3. off to the greatest!

great post, thanks!

[Tanuki]

4. Bix's biography of Hirohito was outstanding, and even though it

was written before the * fiasco was scarcely underway, the themes of how Hirohito's handlers ignored reality and forged ahead on the basis of ideology and self interest, all the while manipulating religious devotion, were eerily resonant. Too bad our present leaders were unable to learn from the catastrophic effects this led to for Japan and the world.

Way to go, Herbert Bix....K&R

[Hissyspit]

6. I believe I remember hearing him interviewed about it at the time it came out,

although I have not read it myself, and remember when it got the Pulitzer.p]

[peacetalksforall]

23. They haven't even learned lessons of barbarian invader-plunderers.

Or from modern communism, fascism, didtatorships. Nor from the bible or religious teachings of the Christianity for U.S. Christians that they and the Robertson types manipulate so well. For corporations and foundations and the barons (while they make themselves barons).

[mmonk]

5. The point I've tried to make all along.

"Despite these realities, impeachment can succeed even in failing, for it is as much a political maneuver as a constitutional "tool." An impeachment process that is constantly propelled from below carries within itself the potential to advance a democratic agenda that goes beyond the circumstances that brought it about. One of its positive effects would be to weaken the dangerously expanded powers of the executive branch."

[Hissyspit]

7. .

[HCE SuiGeneris]

9. kick

:kick: :kick: :kick:

[Cleita]

10. Some of us are. Hopefully, more and more Americans will

join in pushing for impeachment and imprisonment. There is no doubt in my minds that they have committed treason, but we need investigations and court proceedings of some sort to find out the facts.

[Peace Patriot]

11. Your snipped paragraph is interesting...

"Many Americans are aware that Bush and Cheney, WITH THE CONNIVANCE OF KEY MEMBERS OF BOTH PARTIES, planned, initiated, and conducted wars of aggression and occupation that have essentially destroyed entire countries. They have infringed the prerogatives of the legislative and judicial branches; authorized the CIA and the military to torture and mistreat detainees; violated the revised Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and the Fourth Amendment by ordering warrant-less electronic surveillance of Americans; curtailed the civil liberties of all Americans by abolishing the right of habeas corpus for detainees at Guantanamo and anyone else the government labels an "enemy combatant." --Herbert P. Bix (emphasis added)

Many political commentators ignore the role played by "key Democrats" not only in fomenting unjust war, shredding the Constitution and curtailing civil liberties, but also in the most corrupt and "black-holed" aspect of Bush/Cheney empowerment: the electronic voting coup of 2002-2004, by which rightwing Bushite corporations took over the "counting" of our votes, in machines run on "TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code, with virtually no audit/recount controls.

Professor Bix mentions the first--the connivance of key Democrats--but fails to mention the second--the loss of transparent vote counting. And it is the SECOND item that is most responsible for Congress' failure to impeach Bush/Cheney on a truly unprecedented and amazing list of "high crimes and misdemeanors." My guestimate--and that of statistical experts--is that Diebold/ES&S are putting a 5% to 10% "thumb on the scales" in our elections, in favor of Bushites, warmongers and corporatists. Combined with our filthy campaign contribution system, and other vote suppression, the people--75% of whom oppose the Iraq War and want it ended--were only able to achieve a 50/50 Congress, which does not have sufficient votes to do the peoples' will. The Democratic leadership is now arranging a COMPROMISE on the war with THE CRIMINALS WHO PERPETRATED IT, that will mean, a) continued killing and occupation for an indefinite period, b) continued massive war budgets, c) the constant threat of expanded war in the tinderbox of the Middle East.

And no relief in sight. Regarding the 2008 presidential election, I am reminded of the choices given us in 1968. A Democratic War, or a Republican War. Take your pick. In those days, the war profiteers assassinated anybody who got in their way (JFK, MLK, RFK). Today, they just Diebold them (shave off or change sufficient votes to keep them out of power).

This is the reality. Why else would Nancy Pelosi, coming right out a victorious election, in which THE issue was the Iraq War, would say, "Impeachment is off the table," when no impeachment CLEARLY MEANS continued war?

I can think of one reason she would say this (besides wondering WHAT "table" she was talking about, and who was sitting at it): A stealth plan to prevent a war on Iran. It could be she traded impeachment for no war on Iran. (WHAT "table," Nancy?) And, although my democratic soul cries out against such stealth deals, I cannot say that I wouldn't have done the same, in her place. We are a medieval society now, where powerful barons and dukes and counts rule over us, and struggle among themselves for control of US military and financial power. Some of these royalists are better than others, as to the common good.

But how did this happen? The Democrats lack of a veto-proof majority and the votes for impeachment is THEIR OWN FAULT. THEY voted for the "Help America Vote for Bush Act" of 2002, and APPROVED the spread of Bushite-controlled secret vote counting machines. Apparently, they don't want democracy--or a government of, by and for the people--any more than the Bushites do. (It's true that, regarding the Senate, only 1/3 of it was up for reelection this time, and it is thus still full of Bushites and warmongers, but HOW did those jerks get "elected" in 2004, or (to some extent) in 2002? The same way Bush did--via "trade secret" vote counting, and vote suppression. And if the House was truly representative of the American people--and had not also been shaped by Diebold/ES&S, vote suppression and filthy money--it would have much more clout in antiwar and pro-impeachment votes. 40 to 50 seats would have gone anti-Bush, instead of 30.*)

Professor Bix says impeach. How do you do that, when such a compromised election system shaping Congress to prevent just that?

I can't really take any political commentator seriously who doesn't point this out. It's the voting machines, stupid! THAT is why there is no impeachment. THAT is why the war continues. The barons and dukes and counts--whatever their secret deals might be--ARRANGED FOR the people of this country NOT to be at the "table," when they supported the takeover of our elections system by rightwing Bushite corporations.

-------------------------

*(A key to understanding this situation is that this "Democratic" Congress has yet to deal with the dispute in FL-13. In the FL-13 Congressional election in '06, ES&S voting machines 'disappeared' 18,000 Democratic votes for Congress, in an election decided by some 300 votes. When the lawyers for Democrat Christine Jennings (--of course, it's always the Democrat who "loses" in Diebold/ES&S "vote counting") took the matter to court, and demanded to see ES&S's "trade secret" code, to try to figure out what happened to those 18,000 votes, ES&S REFUSED, and said that their "right" to profit from our election system with secret, proprietary "vote counting" trumps the right of the voters to know how their votes were counted! And the judge agreed with ES&S! The Democratic Congress--which holds ultimate power in this situation--has done NOTHING about it. They are dicking around with "hearings" which haven't even begun. In this--and also in their proposals for "fixing" our broken election system--they are PROTECTING the secret code. Why?)

[ninkasi]

14. Excellent post, Peace Patriot

Until we can have fair elections, we won't be able to have the people we vote for winning. It's hard to believe, after all of the many problems that have been well documented, that we still have to rely on Diebold/ES&S counting our votes. If there were as many glitches in ATMs as there are in the machines that tally our votes, there would be an uproar.

[tomp]

32. the connivance of both parties, the rigging of elections, and...

...the conniving press. the trifecta!

[Faygo Kid]

12. "Impeachment can succeed even in failing." Yes, it's now a moral imperative.

We can't assume that a new administration will take office in 2009. The failure to install u.s. attorney puppets is just a setback, not a loss. They will do what it takes. We have to fight back and keep them on the defensive. If they are on the offense, and we are constantly on the defensive, they will do whatever they need to do to retain power.

[TwilightGardener]

15. I agree--it's a moral imperative. Sometimes you do the right thing

not because it's a good political move, or to make a practical change of course, but because it's the right thing to do, in and of itself. This is one of those circumstances. Letting Chimpy and Crashcart slide their way out of the White House with nothing more than low approval ratings would be a failure of the first magnitude, in terms of upholding the standards we should expect from the leaders of the free world.

[tomp]

31. it's been a moral imperative since dec, 2000.

taking the oath was his first crime as "_resident".

[Kurovski]

13. How did I miss this one?

Thanks, Hissyspit. You certainly do bring in excellent material.

K&R.

[loudsue]

16. This is a GREAT thread!!

I wish we could send threads like this around to every e-mail box in the country.

:kick::kick::kick::kick: & R

[WillyT]

17. Thank You !!! - K & R !!!

:kick:

[MagickMuffin]

18. WOW: Great article! Did you read the first post to the article by Janey?!?!?

It was a longer post than the original article. It was sooooooooooo long winded that I couldn't read it all after reading a small portion I determined this was a Freeper attack...

The next to the last paragraph explained my suspicion:

What on earth do you people do all day? Where in the world do you get your information?

The rest of your post is simply regurgitated left-wing, Daily Kos, Democrat Underground ignorant, alternate-reality talking points. This war looks like Vietnam? Did the North Vietnamese ever come to this country and slaughter 3000 innocent human benigs? This war is nothing like Vietnam and only somebody who is willfully blind and ignorant would say so. This war is about stopping people who think they're going to paradise if they kill us, which, in case you haven't noticed, is quite an incentive.

I look forward to your posting the evidence you have on the decisions Bush and Cheney made during their eight months in office that resulted in 9/11. I have a feeling I'll be waiting a long time. Janey

Sounds to me like one of Rove's minions out in full force.

[Forkboy]

19. But it makes Democrats look bad

[pnorman]

20. I have that "Hirohito" book by that samne author.

Here are a few more very perceptive articles by him:

http://www.howardwfrench.com/archives/2005/08/08/herbert_p_bix_showa_scholar_supreme/
and
http://inside.binghamton.edu/January-February/24jan02/bix.html

pnorman

[petunia.here]

21. K&R!

[peacetalksforall]

22. Cheney must go first, rIght. Since they each have different roles

it would seem that there 'trials' must be separated. If separated, we must remove Cheney first - if not, he will declare martial law if it is at all possible to enforce.

He is more responsible for the war - PNAC author-instigator and mover-shaker. He is the one that bugged the CIA to fake the evidence. He is the one with the connections to the way the war was to be fought. Bush was the direction-taker and the enthusiasm-builder and cheerleader, plus the RNC fund raising podium guy.

I am inspired by this man and what he wrote, so succinctly.

[Poiuyt]

26. The trouble with removing Cheney first is that Bush can appoint his successor

The new VP would then become president when Bush was impeached making him/her the front-runner to win the 2008 election. Better to remove them simultaneously.

[peacetalksforall]

27. Yes, you're right - where is Elizabeth de la Vega? Where are the

lawyers who care about the Constitutuion?

[dweller]

29. his successor

must be first approved by the Congress.

from what i've read here, feel free to point out if i'm incorrect.
dp

[Poiuyt]

33. True. And that brings up an interesting scenario

The Congress has been pretty eager to rubber stamp just about all Bush's appointees, no matter how incompetent or out of the mainstream they might be. I've always assumed that they would gladly support a Bush nominee for VP too. But what if Congress was getting ready to impeach Bush (after removing Cheney from office). Would they quickly confirm Bush's appointee out of respect for the Office of the Presidency? Or would they bide their time waiting to see what happens with the Bush impeachment proceedings?

I know this is conjecture, but it's fun to think about it. I'm guessing there would be a way to remove them simultaneously and avoid the problems.

[BrklynLiberal]

24. Another kick...

PS Every time I see your cartoon, Hissyspit, I just have to smile; a big broad one. Thanks for having that as part of your posting.

I just heard that there is gong to be a movie about Marla Ruzicka.
Kristin Dunst will be playing her...

More info in case anyone does not know who she was.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marla_Ruzicka

[Hissyspit]

30. Yes, I heard about it, too. Coming out this fall, supposedly. n/t

[pberq]

25. Kick & Nominated - excellent!

[Canuckistanian]

28. K&R

Impeachment and subsequent conviction by the Senate is imperative.

The crimes are there. All that's needed is the will and the courage to prosecute them.

[Kurovski]

34. Kick. (nt)

[G_j]

35. Yes! k& r

[muchacho]

36. hummergate

Could someone get Bush/Cheney a blowjob so we can impeach them?!

[EFerrari]

37. Kick

[Greylyn58]

38. Words to live by

or impeach by.

[Hissyspit]

39. one last self-kick n/t