Americans Should Fight For Impeachment Of BUSH-CHENEY

[Psychoblues]

This written by a Pulitzer Prize winner!!!!!!!!!!!


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 hatred.

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."

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.

But of course no American president has ever been convicted for his high crimes and ousted from office; and it may be that without modification of our structurally flawed Constitution none ever will. Moreover, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, a man appointed by the president in accordance with outmoded tradition rather than constitutional prescription, would preside over an impeachment trial and, if convicted, the next president would still have the constitutionally unchecked power to pardon him, just as Ford pardoned Nixon who resigned from office in order to avoid his imminent impeachment.

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.

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

Are his facts correct? I think so. Please refute them responsibly.

[Dilloduck]

This written by a Pulitzer Prize winner!!!!!!!!!!!


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 hatred.

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."

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.

But of course no American president has ever been convicted for his high crimes and ousted from office; and it may be that without modification of our structurally flawed Constitution none ever will. Moreover, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, a man appointed by the president in accordance with outmoded tradition rather than constitutional prescription, would preside over an impeachment trial and, if convicted, the next president would still have the constitutionally unchecked power to pardon him, just as Ford pardoned Nixon who resigned from office in order to avoid his imminent impeachment.

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.

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

Are his facts correct? I think so. Please refute them responsibly.

No---
the Bush/Cheney administration has set aside all standards of international law and morality regarding the use of force.

that statement is false.

[CockySOB]

Dr. Bix is renowned for his study of Japanese history and sociology, and his book which garnered the Pulitzer was Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan (Harper-Collins, 2000). Not exactly material which one would render him an immediate expert on modern American sociology/politics, nor the middle east. He's certainly entitled to his opinion, but it should not be taken as gospel (I think he would agree with that.)

That being said, his writings only begin to make sense if you believe that the USA is striving to become an Empire, such as Hirohito's Japan sought to become. However, Dr. Bix does not provide ANY solid evidence to support many (most) of the assumptions he makes about this administration and past administrations. Instead, he relies on rhetoric and unsubstantiated claims about the GWB administration to "support" his opinion.

Moreover, Dr. Bix is applying his extensive knowledge and research into Japanese culture and mindsets of turn-of-the-century Japan to today's American culture and ideologies. While interesting, the fact remains that the two have distinct differences, and without properly addressing those differences (accommodating them, at the least) leaves his thesis lacking in my opinion.

BTW, Dr. Bix is an interesting author and I did find some of his articles intriguing, especially The Faith that Supports U.S. Violence: Comparative Reflections on the Arrogance of Empires (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=11&ItemID=6146) (Znet, 2004).

[Psychoblues]

I don't know how you figure, CSOB.



Dr. Bix is renowned for his study of Japanese history and sociology, and his book which garnered the Pulitzer was Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan (Harper-Collins, 2000). Not exactly material which one would render him an immediate expert on modern American sociology/politics, nor the middle east. He's certainly entitled to his opinion, but it should not be taken as gospel (I think he would agree with that.)

That being said, his writings only begin to make sense if you believe that the USA is striving to become an Empire, such as Hirohito's Japan sought to become. However, Dr. Bix does not provide ANY solid evidence to support many (most) of the assumptions he makes about this administration and past administrations. Instead, he relies on rhetoric and unsubstantiated claims about the GWB administration to "support" his opinion.

Moreover, Dr. Bix is applying his extensive knowledge and research into Japanese culture and mindsets of turn-of-the-century Japan to today's American culture and ideologies. While interesting, the fact remains that the two have distinct differences, and without properly addressing those differences (accommodating them, at the least) leaves his thesis lacking in my opinion.

BTW, Dr. Bix is an interesting author and I did find some of his articles intriguing, especially The Faith that Supports U.S. Violence: Comparative Reflections on the Arrogance of Empires (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=11&ItemID=6146) (Znet, 2004).

Dr. Bix is a Pulitzer Prize winner, an accomplished professor of history, an admitted conservative and quite opinionated on the crimes as committed by GWB and his other brain Dick Cheney. Do you have anything to refute his claims or are you just giving your obviously juvenile opinion of the man, Dr. Bix?

[lily]

Pffffttt......when I read articles like this, I just sit back and think how much fun it's going to be in '08 when a Democrat gets in office! Only thing I have to wonder about is the Democrat going to abuse the power as badly or return things to normal......what ever normal is now.

[manu1959]

Pffffttt......when I read articles like this, I just sit back and think how much fun it's going to be in '08 when a Democrat gets in office! Only thing I have to wonder about is the Democrat going to abuse the power as badly or return things to normal......what ever normal is now.

which dem would that be?

[Gunny]

which dem would that be?

Who cares? I'm just thinking about four years of dishing it out as hot and heavy as it came in the past 6.:cool:

[lily]

which dem would that be?

I'm not sure yet. Obama is too smooth, Hillary is too weird, maybe Edwards? It's too soon to figure out yet.

I have to admit though Guillani didn't impress me until the debates....but it doesn't matter, because it's going to be a Democrat.....I'd definately vote for Gore, but he's so into the envirioment that he can do more as a private citizen.

[manu1959]

I'm not sure yet. Obama is too smooth, Hillary is too weird, maybe Edwards? It's too soon to figure out yet.

I have to admit though Guillani didn't impress me until the debates....but it doesn't matter, because it's going to be a Democrat.....I'd definately vote for Gore, but he's so into the envirioment that he can do more as a private citizen.

i think it will be the actor v the actor......

[lily]

i think it will be the actor v the actor......

Ok, what am I missing? Fred Thompson and who? Gore?

[manu1959]

Ok, what am I missing? Fred Thompson and who? Gore?

yea the two actors.....

[lily]

yea the two actors.....

It would make it interesting.

[82Marine89]

This written by a Pulitzer Prize winner!!!!!!!!!!!




Jimmy Carters Peace prize award proved these things are worthless. His opinion carries no more weight than mine. He's just another globalist piece of crap that has overstayed his 15 minutes.

[lily]

Jimmy Carters Peace prize award proved these things are worthless. His opinion carries no more weight than mine. He's just another globalist piece of crap that has overstayed his 15 minutes.

I guess brokering a peace deal that still stands to this day is worthless to some. Yo do know there is a difference between a Pulitzer and a Nobel, right?

[CockySOB]

I don't know how you figure, CSOB.

Dr. Bix is a Pulitzer Prize winner, an accomplished professor of history, an admitted conservative and quite opinionated on the crimes as committed by GWB and his other brain Dick Cheney. Do you have anything to refute his claims or are you just giving your obviously juvenile opinion of the man, Dr. Bix?
I gave my opinion based on what I've read of the guy. He's obviously an authority on Japanese history, but he's done nothing notable with respect to Western civilization. So what if he's "an admitted conservative?" First, I don't recall reading his words to such effect; and second, what bearing does that have on what I think of his opinion? His claims are simply his opinion, jsut as mine are. And while I find his writing interesting and thought-provoking in the context of his specialty, I don't buy into his assertion about "crimes" by George Bush or "his cohorts" (a term Dr. Bix uses numerous times in his writings). What is ironic is that Dr. Bix makes mention of how terminology can indicate a subconscious drive (both individual and societal), and he uses words like "cohorts" and "criminals" without a second thought. While I'm sure that such terminology makes his writings not only palatable, but inviting for you Psycho, for me it signals predisposition and a high potential for bias.

You might consider some of his other writings that are available. As I said, I quite enjoyed some of his articles even though I didn't see him make a solid correlation between Hirohito's Japan and 21st century American cultures or mindsets.

BTW, for all those still taking their medications, or at least not skipping their breakfast, Dr. Bix IS worth reading. He does make some intriguing hypotheses about how the USA has moved as an empire since WWII, although I found some of his assertions unconvincing.

[82Marine89]

I guess brokering a peace deal that still stands to this day is worthless to some. Yo do know there is a difference between a Pulitzer and a Nobel, right?

Yup, I made it past 8th grade. It still doesn't make his opinion any better than mine. His award and a buck fifty will get him a cup of coffee at Denny's.

[Psychoblues]

Excuuuuuse the hell out of me, CSOB.



I gave my opinion based on what I've read of the guy. He's obviously an authority on Japanese history, but he's done nothing notable with respect to Western civilization. So what if he's "an admitted conservative?" First, I don't recall reading his words to such effect; and second, what bearing does that have on what I think of his opinion? His claims are simply his opinion, jsut as mine are. And while I find his writing interesting and thought-provoking in the context of his specialty, I don't buy into his assertion about "crimes" by George Bush or "his cohorts" (a term Dr. Bix uses numerous times in his writings). What is ironic is that Dr. Bix makes mention of how terminology can indicate a subconscious drive (both individual and societal), and he uses words like "cohorts" and "criminals" without a second thought. While I'm sure that such terminology makes his writings not only palatable, but inviting for you Psycho, for me it signals predisposition and a high potential for bias.

You might consider some of his other writings that are available. As I said, I quite enjoyed some of his articles even though I didn't see him make a solid correlation between Hirohito's Japan and 21st century American cultures or mindsets.

BTW, for all those still taking their medications, or at least not skipping their breakfast, Dr. Bix IS worth reading. He does make some intriguing hypotheses about how the USA has moved as an empire since WWII, although I found some of his assertions unconvincing.

I simply asked you to refute the arguments made by Dr. Bix and you obfuscate the request by your implication that I requested something other. I am certainly glad to see that you find some of his work at least interesting. That alone indicates curiosity but by no means implies intelligence.

You got anything towards the accusations and implications as described by the Doctor?

[loosecannon]

Well I agreed with the author's premise before i read it.

It would be dangerous to our nation NOT to impeach Bush and Cheney.

We would be leaving the door open to abuse that most of you can not conceive of as a result.

No DEM pres or GOP pres should have the powers Bush is working diligently to attain for the executive branch.

You might be sold on the bill of goods that justifies the behavior of our dear leader.

But you would be wrong.

There is more happening behind the scenes than just politics. There is a solid and creeping movement to sell off the assets of our nation, empower corps without restriction, offshore our jobs, offshore corps for purposes of immunity from prosecution and a creep toward the "divine right of kings".

Carol Lamm is reported to have actually claimed the divine right of kings in a motion she filed on behalf of the BA before she was fired.

No exceptions! No violation of the existing constitutional boundaries are acceptable. NONE.

MANY chips have been hewn away from our constitutional rights and constraints in the last 6 years. NOTHING good will come from this trajectory.

[emmett]

I don't know how you figure, CSOB.




Dr. Bix is a Pulitzer Prize winner, an accomplished professor of history, an admitted conservative and quite opinionated on the crimes as committed by GWB and his other brain Dick Cheney. Do you have anything to refute his claims or are you just giving your obviously juvenile opinion of the man, Dr. Bix?

Psycho, really now! Namecalling! Dr. Bix is a great guy man but you know Pulitzer prizes are not what they used to be.

I would find it hard to believe that an intelligent fellow like yourself would be in total agreement with everything detail of that write.

And..just out of curiosity, what exact crime have they committed? Maybe reference a little case law!

[lily]

Yup, I made it past 8th grade. It still doesn't make his opinion any better than mine. His award and a buck fifty will get him a cup of coffee at Denny's.

You've got me confused, whose opinion Bix or Carter? I'll agree with you on Bix, he's entiteled to his opinion, no one says you have to agree with it....... and I'm not sure how Carter even entered into the discussion.

[CockySOB]

Excuuuuuse the hell out of me, CSOB.

I simply asked you to refute the arguments made by Dr. Bix and you obfuscate the request by your implication that I requested something other. I am certainly glad to see that you find some of his work at least interesting. That alone indicates curiosity but by no means implies intelligence.

You got anything towards the accusations and implications as described by the Doctor?

Why should I "refute" his opinion? Is he not entitled to his opinion? And am I not entitled to state my own opinion (and I clearly stated it as such). I'm curious whether you have bothered to read his other published articles related to USA foreign policy, or are you simply hiding in the article you posted?

As to Dr. Bix's assertions and allegations about the GWB administration, I will simply repeat that they are unfounded and unsupported. If you believe that the GWB administration is guilty of "war crimes," etc. then you would probably lap up his opinion and treat it as fact (which you seem to be doing). I maintain that in my opinion, Dr. Bix's personal bias may well be coloring his writing. And as I also said, even that doesn't mean we should dismiss his writing out-of-hand, but rather take it with a grain of salt, just as anyone else's opinion.

I'm actually impressed that you can read anything beyond Dr. Seuss, but I think you're still not quite up on the whole "critical thinking" deal. Perhaps in time, you'll get the hang of it... a long while.

[emmett]

Excuuuuuse the hell out of me, CSOB.




I simply asked you to refute the arguments made by Dr. Bix and you obfuscate the request by your implication that I requested something other. I am certainly glad to see that you find some of his work at least interesting. That alone indicates curiosity but by no means implies intelligence.

You got anything towards the accusations and implications as described by the Doctor?

What exact laws are they guilty of breaking?

[Psychoblues]

You are so silly, emmett. I am no judge or jury and neither is Dr. Bix. But the interesting questions that even CSOB agrees as worthy of consideration have not been answered to anybody's satisfaction and particularly in this conversation yours, CSOB's and mine.





What exact laws are they guilty of breaking?

Let the hearings commence!!!!!! And come what may from them!!!!!!!!!!

[Psychoblues]

Rather than edit, I will post another thought. Impeachment hearings are only hearings. Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives but he was not found guilty by the Senate. Legally speaking, he was certainly impeached.

Let's see how these hearings progress on the hill now for the many crimes, war crimes, crimes against the freedoms of Americans, crimes against the UN Charters and Crimes against civilization as perpetrated by the present CIC turn out in the investigations of the professionals that have been elected to do these investigations.

[avatar4321]

No---

that statement is false.

Not only is it false, it demonstrates a complete lack of understanding on how international law works. It's mostly based on treaty and customs. And both treaties and customs can be changed simply by disregarding it and creating new law through ones actions.

[avatar4321]

I guess brokering a peace deal that still stands to this day is worthless to some. Yo do know there is a difference between a Pulitzer and a Nobel, right?

Does the difference really matter?

Seriously does receiving an award really make ones opinion any more valid than someone elses? Especially awards that are highly politicized. The pulitzer is not as politicized as the peace prize, but it still is.

Should we listen to Miss America's opinion simply because Donald Trump gives her a title? Should we listen to any number of actors simply because they have oscars?

its a false appeal to authority because these awards dont matter a hill of beans in the world. Its nice to be honored, but the person who wins is no better than anyone else in the world.

[avatar4321]

No DEM pres or GOP pres should have the powers Bush is working diligently to attain for the executive branch.


Yeah, heaven forbid the President of the United States in either party actually have the power dictated to the executive branch of the Constitution as it was given. No of course not. We should completely ignore it because Congess doesnt like it.

[Psychoblues]

I dunno, a4321. The last congress LOVED IT!!!!!!!!




Yeah, heaven forbid the President of the United States in either party actually have the power dictated to the executive branch of the Constitution as it was given. No of course not. We should completely ignore it because Congess doesnt like it.

Tough Titty said the Kitty, but the milk sure tastes good!!!!!!!!!!

You're a sweet one just like your buddy ol' double dimple chin, aren't you?

[lily]

Rather than edit, I will post another thought. Impeachment hearings are only hearings. Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives but he was not found guilty by the Senate. Legally speaking, he was certainly impeached.

Let's see how these hearings progress on the hill now for the many crimes, war crimes, crimes against the freedoms of Americans, crimes against the UN Charters and Crimes against civilization as perpetrated by the present CIC turn out in the investigations of the professionals that have been elected to do these investigations.

I would rather have my tax dollars spent on what they are doing now. Getting rid of a lying Attorney General, getting us out of Iraq, finding out how all those terrible mistakes were made and how to correct them. Impeachment is a waste of time and money. It won't happen in time to get Bush out of office and as I've said many times already, I'm not in favor of Cheney being CIC and if that ever happened the Republicans would have a valid candidtate for 2008, with whoever they put in the vice president's place. Impeachment is not good for either the Democrats and the rest of America is divided enough. That would just make it worse.

[lily]

Does the difference really matter?

Call me silly, but I think brokering a peace deal that has lasted all these years does matter. I say let's see if he can broker a deal between Israel and Palestine. Odd, I thought part of Bush going into Iraq was to stabalize the middle east. If he can do that, I say give him the medal.




Should we listen to Miss America's opinion simply because Donald Trump gives her a title? Should we listen to any number of actors simply because they have oscars?

I'll tell you what, when Miss America, Donald Trump or any actor gets a pulitzer or the nobel, I say we listen to them. Deal? I value education and experience.


its a false appeal to authority because these awards dont matter a hill of beans in the world. Its nice to be honored, but the person who wins is no better than anyone else in the world.

Well, obviously I see them in a different light, so I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree.

[Doniston]

This written by a Pulitzer Prize winner!!!!!!!!!!!


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 hatred.

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."

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.

But of course no American president has ever been convicted for his high crimes and ousted from office; and it may be that without modification of our structurally flawed Constitution none ever will. Moreover, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, a man appointed by the president in accordance with outmoded tradition rather than constitutional prescription, would preside over an impeachment trial and, if convicted, the next president would still have the constitutionally unchecked power to pardon him, just as Ford pardoned Nixon who resigned from office in order to avoid his imminent impeachment.

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.

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

Are his facts correct? I think so. Please refute them responsibly.Quite reasonable and basically correct.

[avatar4321]

I dunno, a4321. The last congress LOVED IT!!!!!!!!





Tough Titty said the Kitty, but the milk sure tastes good!!!!!!!!!!

You're a sweet one just like your buddy ol' double dimple chin, aren't you?

what the heck does this have to do with anything? You didnt respond to anything i said in the entire post? You are making everyone who reads that post, dumber for having done so.

[avatar4321]

Call me silly, but I think brokering a peace deal that has lasted all these years does matter. I say let's see if he can broker a deal between Israel and Palestine. Odd, I thought part of Bush going into Iraq was to stabalize the middle east. If he can do that, I say give him the medal.

I'll tell you what, when Miss America, Donald Trump or any actor gets a pulitzer or the nobel, I say we listen to them. Deal? I value education and experience.

Well, obviously I see them in a different light, so I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree.

I guess we have to. Because its clear that their awards are completely meaningless and make them no better than anyone else.

[shattered]

Americans Should Fight For Impeachment Of BUSH-CHENEY

Umm.. Hmm... Even with as much gusto as you put into that, I'm going with... NO. ;)

[loosecannon]

Yeah, heaven forbid the President of the United States in either party actually have the power dictated to the executive branch of the Constitution as it was given. No of course not. We should completely ignore it because Congess doesnt like it.

You are full of shit Avatar. The signing statements are an obvious breach of the oath of office.

The CIC has absolutely NO defined powers listed over the military whereas there are something like 20 broad powers over the military assigned to the Congress in Article I.

The pres does not have the right to ignore the laws passed by previous congress and signed by previous Pres's like the FISA law.

The Pres does not have the right to lie to the congress or the public for political reasons, only for matters of national security and to retain the integrity of classified info.

The pres does not have the right to out a CIA operative for political reasons WHICH BUSH ADMITTED TO DOING thru his chain of command but under his authority.

The pres is not above the law, can not invoke the divine right of kings, can not circumvent the oversight or budgetary powers of congress.

You couldnt be a more full of shit apologist for power.

Why don't you change your member name to Machiavelli