Big Dick Cheney's Impeachable Crimes

It's long, It's dense, but it pretty well answers the people who want you to believe that Cheney and Bush are caring patriots who only have your safety at heart.

I think our Founding Fathers would be appalled, that in some 200-plus years, we never used that clause they put in our Constitution, except fecklessly, and in one case, successfully. The Articles of Impeachment that threatened Richard Nixon certainly were the reason he decided to resign.... And if you look at Clinton, and the peccadilloes for which they brought impeachment proceedings against him, as compared with the "high crimes and misdemeanors"—and that's a direct quote from Article II of the Constitution—with regard to Cheney and Bush, I think there's a helluva lot better case, with regard to Cheney and Bush." —Lawrence Wilkerson

Settle in and read the whole thing.

Everywhere you look, Sleeper Cells, Republican Pod people.

Kango X at Daily Kos:

How deep are we in it over the politicization of the Justice Department (and probably others) under the Bush "administration?"

Way deep.

This is a planned disaster. A burning of all bridges and a scorching of all escape routes. In other words, the routine Republican m.o.: destroy all paths back to the status quo, so that even if our theories don't pan out, nobody can pull them out by the roots -- they can only tinker with the ruins.

[...]

I wrote earlier about this unfolding scandal that Bush, Rove and Gonzales have now done for the prosecution of public corruption what they've done for impeachment. That is, just as they've made it conventional wisdom to immediately reject the idea of impeachment out of hand as "partisan revenge for Clinton," or "political tit for tat," now so too will the investigation of public corruption cases be subject to such summary dismissal.

The long term effects of this scandal are incalculable. At a time when Republicans are accused of engaging in rampant and systematic public corruption, Rove, Bush and Gonzales have succeeded in making corruption investigations into the same sort of partisan joke that Republicans made impeachment. And as their crimes come to light in the closing days of their "administration" and into the next, they may well have made it impossible for a Democratic successor to actually pursue justice on behalf of the American people, since any such effort will undoubtedly -- and with a lack of shame that shocks the conscience -- be labeled as "partisan revenge."

More and Here Also see

You know that SciFi channel bumper? Where the guy starts pulling the hair out of his head?

That hair is AG Gonzales. He is the thread that will unravel Bushco.
He MUST be impeached.
Arianna at Hufffington

If the president continues trying to run out the clock on this scandal, Congress should immediately begin impeachment proceedings against Alberto Gonzales. It's the quickest way to the truth.

Appearing on CNN's Late Edition, Joe DiGenova said that if Congress insists on issuing subpoenas, the White House will surely contest them, and the ensuing litigation will last until the end of Bush's term. DiGenova's point was that Congress should go ahead and compromise, but my takeaway was just the opposite: if Bush's game is to stall, Congress should play the impeachment card since, as Robert Kuttner points out, "an impeachment inquiry could be completed in a matter of months."

Read the rest

More on the idea of going for the low hanging fruit.

Special delivery gift from Dubya. A big can of Whoop-Ass

From thereisnospoon at My Left Wing:

What an extraordinary gift Bush has given the Democratic Party and the American People. For months if not years, Democrats and Progressives have wrung our hands and beaten our heads against the wall: should we move to impeach? Whom, exactly, should we impeach? How can we do it? On what grounds? Will the American people stand with us, or against us? Above all, how can we do it without making Republicans look like the victims of a partisan witch hunt? [...]

Thankfully for Democrats, the American People and the United States Constitution, George Bush's recalcitrance, petulance, and extraordinary loyalty to his corrupt cronies have already answered all those vexing questions for us. Rather than our bringing the confrontation to him, George Bush is bringing the confrontation of Constitutional crisis to us. [...]

In sum, Bush has given us every possible political cover and excuse for impeaching him, on an issue for which he has little to no congressional support among Republicans. It's wrapped up in a neat little package with a bowtie. It is, frankly, a generous gift to our Party, our Nation, and our Constitution.

All we need is the courage to open it.

More

No, it's not the set-up for a really sad joke... Robert Reich asks What Can Possibly Be in Bush's Head?

The points Reich makes are good commentary, but some of the best comments are, remarkably, in the comments. Read them too.

Question: Why is Bush willing to risk his party’s future, as well as his own legacy, by putting more troops into Iraq when it’s clear to almost everyone – including top military brass, foreign policy experts, and most analysts and journalists on the ground there – that Iraq is descending so quickly into civil war that more troops won’t make a bit of difference except causing more American deaths and instigating more violence?

Read more

When Bush's own people tell you we are going to attack Iran, it's time to listen. Then Stop him!

Steven D at Booman Tribune

There are plans to attack Iran, and they aren't merely "contingency plans" that the US Military prepares for all potential adversaries, as many claim. How do I know this? Why is Harry Reid warning the President? Read on ...

US contingency planning for military action against Iran's nuclear programme goes beyond limited strikes and would effectively unleash a war against the country, a former US intelligence analyst said on Friday.

"I've seen some of the planning ... You're not talking about a surgical strike," said Wayne White, who was a top Middle East analyst for the State Department's bureau of intelligence and research until March 2005.

"You're talking about a war against Iran" that likely would destabilise the Middle East for years, White told the Middle East Policy Council, a Washington think tank.

"We're not talking about just surgical strikes against an array of targets inside Iran. We're talking about clearing a path to the targets" by taking out much of the Iranian Air Force, Kilo submarines, anti-ship missiles that could target commerce or US warships in the Gulf, and maybe even Iran's ballistic missile capability, White said.

When people who served in Bush's administration speak out we ought to take them seriously. Time after time, however, the media has either ignored these voices (General Shinseki, General Zinni) or attempted to marginalize and smear them (Richard Clarke, David Kuo, Paul O'Neill). Well, it's long past time for that sort of behavior. Mr. White's claims about Bush's war plan for Iran should be front page news on every major American newspaper, but they were not.

More

Surgin' an' Purgin' with Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman explains why the administration has suddenly begun firing federal prosecutors:

Surging and Purging, by Paul Krugman, Commentary, NY Times: There’s something happening here, and what it is seems completely clear: the Bush administration is trying to protect itself by purging independent-minded prosecutors.

[...]

Since the middle of last month, the Bush administration has pushed out at least four U.S. attorneys, and possibly as many as seven, without explanation. The list includes Carol Lam ... who successfully prosecuted Duke Cunningham, a Republican congressman, on major corruption charges. The top F.B.I. official in San Diego ...[said] that Ms. Lam’s dismissal would undermine multiple continuing investigations. ...

[S]uch a wholesale firing of prosecutors ... isn’t normal... Why, then, are prosecutors that the Bush administration itself appointed suddenly being pushed out? The likely answer is that for the first time the administration is really worried about where corruption investigations might lead.

More...

The avalanch is coming for George W. Bush.

Olbermann does it again. The cut is to the quick, and there is no staunching of the blood.
Booman at Booman Tribune

The country has finally turned on George W. Bush. The country is in a very bad and testy mood. At the extreme, tonight's Special Comment on Keith Olbermann's Countdown was the most blistering indictment of a sitting President in the history of broadcast television. I have never seen anything like it. It violated every law of Higher Broderism. It even passed into raw conspiracy theory at points. In different and more stable times, a rant like Olbermann's would mark the swift end of his career. But our nation has entered into a new stage. Olbermann will pay no price for his outburst because even though it was extreme, it was an extremism that has now entered the boundaries of acceptable discourse. The country has no more use for George W. Bush and it has no will to rally to his defense.

Read on...

Would things be this screwed up if Ford had not pardoned Nixon?

Taylor Marsh

The full impeachment and removal of Richard M. Nixon might have healed this country, not just put a political bandage on the disgrace that was his presidency. Instead, all Mr. Ford's pardon did was prove to men coming up next, like Mr. Reagan and Mr. Bush, that the president is above the law and in an orbit all his own.

We'll never know what might have been, but former President Ford made a decision that taught a generation something antithetical to the American way. He taught my generation and the ones before mine that if you were powerful enough you could get away with anything.

More