Bush’s Impeachable Offenses

It’s starting to feel like time to dump some of that “boy am I just really sick of George W. Bush, and his administstration” bile again.

Let’s start with a pointer to Jodin Morey’s three-part (so far) heavily-footnoted examination of the impeachable offenses Bush has committed.

The first part focuses on the question of illegal wars, in a 21-point analysis. Here’s a snippet:

Jan. 31, 2003
The New York Times reports that a secret memo reveals that President Bush and Prime Minister Blair agreed to invade Iraq even without U.N. backing. The Guardian reporting on the same memo states that PRIVATELY:

• “Mr Bush made it clear the US intended to invade whether or not there was a second UN resolution and even if UN inspectors found no evidence of a banned Iraqi weapons programme.”
• “The diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning,” The Guardian reported that Bush told Blair.
• The memo is also said to reveal that President Bush suggested “flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft planes with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours,” in order to provoke Saddam to shoot on them, therefore putting Iraq in breach of United Nations resolutions.

None of the items are surprises, of course, but there is something pleasantly stark about seeing everything laid out in a timeline.

The second part of the series takes an 11-part look at the question of illegal spying. Here’s a snippet from that one:

Aug. 17, 2006
U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled that the NSA wiretapping program violates the 1st and 4th Amendments to the Constitution.
“‘There are no hereditary kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution,’ she said in her 44-page decision. Taylor said that if the program were allowed to continue, it would irreparably harm the rights of the plaintiffs, which included the American Civil Liberties Union, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Greenpeace, and individuals, including scholars and attorneys. ‘The public interest is clear in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution,’ Taylor wrote. In response to the assertion that the warrantless wiretapping program was necessary to the defense of the nation, Taylor quoted a 1967 decision of then-Chief Justice Earl Warren: “It would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of … those liberties … which makes the defense of the nation worthwhile.” The judge said that if she were to accept the government’s contention that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue, a host of illegal acts by the government ‘would be immunized from judicial scrutiny. It was never the intent of the Framers to give the president such unfettered control, particularly where his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights.’ And she said the plaintiffs had shown that they had suffered ‘a real and concrete harm’ as a result of the surveillance program. Taylor flatly rejected the government lawyers’ contention that they could not defend the case without exposing state secrets. She noted that government officials had publicly confirmed a number of elements of the surveillance program, and that in court their lawyers supported their arguments for the legality of the program without revealing any secrets. Consequently, she said, she found the government’s position that it could not defend the case without classified information ‘disingenuous and without merit.'” (L.A. Times, 8/18/2006)

This madness, of course, still continues, most recently with Bush deciding that he can open the mail warrantlessly and without supervision or accountability.

The third part of the series focuses on the Plame Affair, in another 16-point timeline that covers events up to things happening in Scooter Libby’s trial through Jan 31.

My favourite part of this one, which just so blatantly shows the hypocrisy, is quoted below:

July 19, 2005
President Bush: “If someone committed crime, they will no longer work in my administration.” (July 19, Associated Press)

April 5, 2006
Lewis Libby testifies to a federal grand jury about President Bush authorizing the leaking of classified information. (Fitzgerald filing)

These articles at OhMyNews are really just pulled from the Charges and Evidence section at ImpeachForPeace.org. Instead of waiting for the next articles in the series, you might just want to pop over there to see the similar evidence and citation lists for charges of:

• ILLEGAL BREAKING OF GENEVA CONVENTIONS
• ILLEGAL DETENTION
• ILLEGAL FREEZING OF ACCOUNTS AND RESTRICTION TO FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY

And, of course, even all of this is just a selection of the reprehensible actions and activities for which history will some time hold this Administration to account. Sigh. And yet there are still what, 30% of Americans who approve of this guy? 100 million people? I wonder how many of them would change their minds if he buggered and then ate a child on morning television. Very few, I suspect, especially if the child was Arab looking. Double sigh.