Democracy for New Mexico

Photo of the Day: Rose Bowl Parade Protests

Protesters advocating impeachment of U.S. President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney carry a giant copy of the Constitution as they follow at the end of the 119th annual Rose Parade in Pasadena, California January 1, 2008. REUTERS/Mark Avery (UNITED STATES)

Also see these photos of the Rose Bowl protests on Flickr.

Wexler's Impeach Cheney Effort Gaining Momentum

Rep. Robert Wexler (D-FL) has joined with two other members of the House Judiciary Committee -- Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wi) -- to urge the start of hearings on the Cheney impeachment resolution that was referred to the committee by the U.S. House on November 7th. Learn more at WexlerWantsHearings.com, where you can read an op-ed by the three representatives and sign a petition in support of impeachment hearings that will be submitted to Congress when they return in January. So far, more than 166,000 people have signed it.

Black Friday: Gotta Love This

Crooks and Liars has the story.

(Updated) Kucinich Introduces Cheney Impeachment Resolution

UPDATE: Here's The Nation writer John Nichol's take on what happened today on the U.S. House floor. Rep. Steny Hoyer acted like the cowardly, stubborn loser he is saying, "Impeachment is not on our agenda. We have some major priorities. We need to focus on those." Yeah, because the House is getting so much done!

After much wrangling and "mischievous" voting on the part of Repubs, Steny got the impeachment measure referred to the House Judiciary Committee, effectively preventing a floor debate. Oh, we wouldn't want that, now would we? Heaven forbid if the crimes of the Bush administration were to be debated in the People's House. Excerpt:

It took two more roll calls before members completed the procedural business of sending Kucinich's articles to the Judiciary Committee -- on a final vote of 218-194. That was technically a "win" for Hoyer, but the day belonged to Kucinich. After all, the Ohio congressman and Democratic presidential contender had succeeded -- albeit briefly -- in getting impeachment on the table.

******************
Read all about it and how you can take action to support the measure. There will be an impeachment rally today from 4:00 to 6:00 PM at the corner of Carlise and Comanche in Albuquerque outside the KOAT TV-7 studios. The protest is organized by Call4Democracy.org.

Lawless: Tell Congress to Do Their Damned Job

Raise a ruckess. If we don't do it, who will?

American Democracy: Time Has Come Today

I often feel speechless these days, which isn't a natural state for me. But what more can really be said about the eternal, unabated horrors of the Bush administration and its assaults on government accountability, reason, democracy, the Constitution, civil liberties, the rule of law, the environment, the economy and even common decency? It's all been said -- the savaging of so much has been documented infinitely clearly, repeatedly. And there's more new evidence every day.

What's needed is some listening and, most of all, action on the part of people who have the power to do something about this lawless demogogue and his complicit cronies. We need them (if there are any) to get real -- to be as serious about their opposition as BushCo is about its relentless assault on justice and democracy. Without that, we are dead. Our democracy is dead. Our future is dead. The planet is dead.

Instead, we have business as usual in the Congress, business as usual in the traditional media, business as usual in the citizenry, business as usual everywhere. Are we really supposed to content ourselves with weak, toothless, picky complaints about minor, peripheral matters as the infrastructure of self-government implodes in full sight of anyone willing and able raise their eyes to it?

I do it myself. Busy myself with political day-to-day, with the latest wrinkles in the latest political maneuverings, with the minutia of the machine. I convince myself that doing things that might possibly help to mitigate the worst of BushCo's impacts is worth it, at least for now. But with almost zero in the way of genuine, effective or honest responses from our "leaders" and "representatives," how much longer can I keep it up?

I'm sure many of you reading this can relate. We can't afford any more beating around the bush, literally or figuratively. What we need is for people with real power to wake up and use it on behalf of the people and the democracy. As ex-Marine Bruce Clark (whose son is stationed north of Baghdad) said at the recent Iraq Summer event -- this is TREASON, this is TYRANNY. More and more of the people -- some in relatively high places -- are admitting it, yet our public figures and power brokers limp on, murmuring platitudes. We raise our voices, we protest, we petition, we build cases, we attempt to apply pressure but no matter how convincingly or loudly we do these things, the status quo is allowed to carry on or worsen.

There is a sort of deadly paralysis infecting those who should know better, those who know in their hearts they must act now or forever be silent. We can only do so much out here in the hinterlands. Those in the circles of power are the ones who must, at last, LEAD. They must take it all seriously, for what it is: a no-holds-barred attack on our democracy and everything positive it has ever achieved or can achieve. But is it already too late for even that?

Eloquent critic and writer Chris Floyd says it is in his very long, chilling, but eminently logical piece entitled, "Post-Mortem America: Bush's Year of Triumph and the Hard Way Ahead." I can't possibly quote enough for you to get the full flavor, so please do read the entire post. Here are just a few nuggests, to lure you into reading the whole thing:

The Republic you wanted -- and at one time might have had the power to take back -- is finished. You no longer have the power to keep it; it's not there. It was kidnapped in December 2000, raped by the primed and ready exploiters of 9/11, whored by the war pimps of the 2003 aggression, gut-knifed by the corrupters of the 2004 vote, and raped again by its "rescuers" after the 2006 election. Beaten, abused, diseased and abandoned, it finally died. We are living in its grave.

The annus horribilis of 2007 has turned out to be a year of triumph for the Bush Faction -- the hit men who delivered the coup de grâce to the long-moribund Republic. Bush was written off as a lame duck after the Democrat's November 2006 election "triumph" (in fact, the narrowest of victories eked out despite an orgy of cheating and fixing by the losers), and the subsequent salvo of Establishment consensus from the Iraq Study Group, advocating a de-escalation of the war in Iraq. Then came a series of scandals, investigations, high-profile resignations, even the criminal conviction of a top White House official. But despite all this -- and abysmal poll ratings as well -- over the past eight months Bush and his coupsters have seen every single element of their violent tyranny confirmed, countenanced and extended.

What can we do? What can we do? What can we do? Does anyone know the answer? How can we get those in positions of power to act -- appropriately, strongly and now?

In certain circles words like rebellion and revolution and anarchy and resistance are bandied about as necessities, as the only ways to counteract the forces of high tech fascism. But even in these enclaves, there is no movement strong enough to make a dent. There is only more hand-wringing, criticism, fatalism, empty gestures, rote responses. I suppose this post is just more of the same. The truth is, no-one seems to know what to do or how to do it or how to foment it or how to shape it and inspire it.

The war which we were told the Democrats and ISG consensus would end or wind down has of course been escalated to its greatest level yet -- more troops, more airstrikes, more mercenaries, more Iraqi captives swelling the mammoth prison camps of the occupying power, more instability destroying the very fabric of Iraqi society. The patently illegal surveillance programs of the authoritarian regime have now been codified into law by the Democratic Congress, which has also let stand the evisceration of habeas corpus in the Military Commissions Act, and a raft of other liberty-stripping laws, rules, regulations and executive orders. Bush's self-proclaimed arbitrary power to seize American citizens (and others) without charge and hold them indefinitely -- even kill them -- has likewise been unchallenged by the legislators. Bush has brazenly defied Congressional subpoenas -- and even arbitrarily stripped the Justice Department of the power to enforce them -- to no other reaction than a stern promise from Democratic leaders to "look further into this matter." His spokesmen -- and his "signing statements" -- now openly proclaim his utter disdain for representative government, and assert at every turn his sovereign right to "interpret" -- or ignore -- legislation as he wishes.

What we lack are leaders up to the task, no matter where we look, whether within or without. We need a new Martin Luther King, Jr., a new Mahatma, a new Mother Jones, a new Jefferson, a new suffragette city of sorts. I don't sense anything or anyone like that on the horizon, do you? And I certainly don't sense anything truly up to the task within myself. How about you? Can we the people rise at last, bidden or unbidden, and make any difference at all? Isn't there at least intrinsic value in trying something? But what?

Again, as Floyd writes:

... there is no place left for the kind of [civil disobedience] action that Thoreau advocated. His way – and that of Gandhi and King, who took so much from him – envisions a state opponent which one could hope to shame into honorable action by the superior moral force of principled civil disobedience. But the very hallmark of the present regime is its shamelessness, its utter lack of any sense of honor or principle, its bestial addiction to raw power.

Still, there is this, if only this:

So whatever we can do, we must do it ourselves. If we have no power or influence, if we cannot take large actions, then we must take small ones. Every word or action raised against the overthrow of the Republic will find an echo somewhere, from one person to another to another to the next -- each isolated, individual voice slowly finding its way into a swelling chorus of dissent.

We Can't Make It Here Anymore: Labor Day Edition

The mood of the country this Labor Day seems ripe for a little James McMurtry. A house of cards collapsing in on itself because of crooked deals and unpayable debt. "Free" trade robber barons piling up their tax-free bloat. Criminals in the board rooms and government and K Street. We're entrenched in one corporate quagmire war, while another threatens as Bush plots ways to attack Iran. Oh, and here's what our Democratic "leaders" are saying about continuing funding for Iraq. Happy Labor Day 2007. Think I'll head to the mountains, for some grounding.

(Updated) Monday: Honk to Impeach Bush-Lights On for Impeachment

UPDATE: Event changes: Folks should meet at 8:00 AM to about 9:15 AM at Comanche and Carlisle (KOAT TV, Channel 7). Click for more info.
************************

From Committee to Elect Jason Call:

• When: Monday, August 27, 7 AM - 9:30 AM (Bush will be at fundraiser in Albuq. later in the day.)
• Where: 10 major intersections in Albuquerque (see proposed list below)
• Who: 10 teams of 4-8 people at each site. Please email us if you can participate.
• What: Signs will be provided.
• Why: 40-80 volunteers at 10 intersections will reach 10’s of thousands of commuters. HONK FOR IMPEACHMENT and the LIGHTS ON will let everyone know they are not alone.

Proposed intersections: Yale & Gibson SE, Montgomery & San Mateo NE, Paseo Del Norte & I-25, Ellison and Coors By-pass NW, 4th & Montano NW, Rio Bravo & Isleta, Louisiana & Menaul, others to be added.

For more information contact: Committee to Elect Jason Call, US Cong. 1st Dist. NM Email: Jason@Call4Democracy.org or visit www.Call4Democracy.org

Editor's Note: For other actions on Sunday, August 25 and on Monday, August 26th related to Bush's visit to Los Ranchos de Albuquerque, see this post.

Rep. Tom Udall to Cosponsor Gonzales Impeachment Resolution

The plot thickens. An AP story reports Rep. Tom Udall (D-NM3) will join other House Dems today in introducing a resolution directing the U.S. House Judiciary Committee to investigate whether to impeach Alberto Gonzales:

Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., who was a prosecutor in Washington state in the late 1970s and 1980s, is the lead sponsor of the measure.

Co-sponsors of the resolution include Democratic Reps. Xavier Becerra of California, Michael Arcuri of New York, Ben Chandler of Kentucky, Dennis Moore of Kansas, Bruce Braley of Iowa and Tom Udall of New Mexico.

The Contemptuous Alberto Gonzales

Keith Olbermann's report on Gonzales appearance

Last night, I forced myself to sit through most of CSPAN's rebroadcast of AG Alberto Gonzales' smirking, sullen appearance (I won't call it testimony) before the Senate Judiciary Committee. I admit it -- I yelled at the TV set. Again.

Alberto's rude arrogance, his abject refusal to answer legitimate questions and his "I can't recall" refrains were frustrating enough, but his obvious lying and dissembling were executed without even a smidgeon of shame. Publicly. As if daring the Committee members to do something about it. He obviously feels protected by the Bush-Cheney cabal. As long as he continues to provide them cover, he can break any rule, any law, any protocol, for Bush himself has said he won't allow the Justice Department to investigate or prosecute Alberto for anything.

In any other era, the mainstream media would be all over the story of Alberto's deceit, incompetence and refusal to answer questions representing entirely legal constitutional oversight by the Congress. It would be on TV 24/7, like the Clinton stories were back in the days of Special Prosecutor Starr. Citizens would be up in arms, demanding action.

In any other era, of course, the person serving as president would never have appointed a slug like Gonzales and certainly would have forced a resignation if the AG behaved like Gonzales. In the Bush era, however, this is mere business as usual -- incompetence, dishonesty and acting above the law are commonplace, from the highest echelons of the White House on down. It's the modus operadi of the Bush administration: anti-democratic, unconstitutional and venal.

Will the Congress ever reach its limit and make a stand against Gonzales and his partners in crime? At least the language used by Senators yesterday was blunt indeed. Some Senatorial quotes from the SJC hearing, provided by Dana Milbank of the Washington Post:

"The department is dysfunctional. . . . Every week a new issue arises. . . . That is just decimating, Mr. Attorney General. . . . The list goes on and on. . . . Is your department functioning? . . . What credibility is left for you? . . . Do you expect us to believe that? . . . Your credibility has been breached to the point of being actionable."

And that was just from the top Republican on the committee, Arlen Specter (Pa.). Democrats had to scramble to keep up with the ranking member's contempt.

"I don't trust you," announced Chairman Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), who paused, while swearing in the witness, to emphasize "nothing but the truth" -- as if lecturing a child.

"You just constantly change the story, seemingly to fit your needs to wiggle out of being caught," added Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

"You, sir, are in fact the problem," submitted Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).

What are the Senate's options to get at Gonzales? The choices are confusing, to say the least. A special prosecutor? Contempt of Congress or perjury charges? Impeachment of the AG? What's called "inherent contempt," whereby a trial would be held in the Senate and Gonzales would be seized by the Sergeant-at-Arms if convicted? Legal minds are no doubt working overtime to come up with something that can puncture the in-your-face criminality of Bush and company. Let's hope they get somewhere.

If the precedents being set by this bunch are allowed to stand unchallenged, what hope can we possibly have for the survival of our democracy, constitution or civil liberties?

More video:

• Sen. Chuck Schumer vs. Gonzales
• Sen. Arlen Specter vs. Gonzales
• Chair Patrick Leahy's closing statement (and Code Pink chants to resign)
• CSPAN's complete video of the hearing

Right On, Right On, Right On

Michael Moore riffing on the sins of Sanjay Gupta, CNN and the MSM. Gogogogogogogogo. Admit it -- you, yourself, have often yelled at the TV set with similar passion when Wolfie or another of the mocking bobbleheads is twisting reality to suit the overlords, haven't you? Gupta's review of Sicko that precipitated Moore's rant.

On the ever widening impeachment front, there's this. I hope they don't shoot it out of the sky. Nothing is impossible these days in the Bush-Cheney Land of a Thousand Nightmares.

Public Down on Libby Commutation, Up on Impeachment

As reported at Pollster.com:

A new American Research Group national survey of 1,100 adults (conducted 7/3 through 7/5) finds:

• 31% approve of "President George W. Bush commuting the 30-month prison sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby while leaving intact Mr. Libby's conviction for perjury and obstruction of justice in the CIA leak case;" 64% disapprove.

• 11% favor a complete presidential pardon for Libby; 84% oppose.

• 45% favor "the US House of Representatives beginning impeachment proceedings against President George W. Bush;" 46% oppose.

• 54% favor "US House of Representatives beginning impeachment proceedings against Vice President Dick Cheney;" 40% oppose.

Then you've got General William Odom, Reagan's NSA Chief, suggesting a way to get Bush to get out of Iraq that is based on a threat of impeachment for the "high crime" of sacrificing the lives of troops for "his own personal interest":

As reported on Think Progress:

Reagan’s NSA Chief: Withdraw funds, pull out, impeach. Gen. William Odom, the former head of the National Security Agency under President Reagan, writes that Congress should begin cutting off funds for Iraq and must force Bush to begin a withdrawal before he leaves office:

To force him to begin a withdrawal before then, the first step should be to rally the public by providing an honest and candid definition of what “supporting the troops” really means and pointing out who is and who is not supporting our troops at war. The next step should be a flat refusal to appropriate money for to be used in Iraq for anything but withdrawal operations with a clear deadline for completion.

The final step should be to put that president on notice that if ignores this legislative action and tries to extort Congress into providing funds by keeping U.S. forces in peril, impeachment proceeding will proceed in the House of Representatives. Such presidential behavior surely would constitute the “high crime” of squandering the lives of soldiers and Marines for his own personal interest.

When In the Course of Human Events ...

Olbermann Special Comment: Bush, Cheney Should Resign
Keith Olbermann, MSNBC Countdown
Tuesday 03 July 2007

Text version:

"I didn't vote for him," an American once said, "But he's my president, and I hope he does a good job."

That - on this eve of the 4th of July - is the essence of this democracy, in 17 words. And that is what President Bush threw away yesterday in commuting the sentence of Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

The man who said those 17 words - improbably enough - was the actor John Wayne. And Wayne, an ultra-conservative, said them, when he learned of the hair's-breadth election of John F. Kennedy instead of his personal favorite, Richard Nixon in 1960.

"I didn't vote for him but he's my president, and I hope he does a good job."

The sentiment was doubtlessly expressed earlier, but there is something especially appropriate about hearing it, now, in Wayne's voice: The crisp matter-of-fact acknowledgement that we have survived, even though for nearly two centuries now, our Commander-in-Chief has also served, simultaneously, as the head of one political party and often the scourge of all others.

We as citizens must, at some point, ignore a president's partisanship. Not that we may prosper as a nation, not that we may achieve, not that we may lead the world - but merely that we may function.

But just as essential to the seventeen words of John Wayne, is an implicit trust - a sacred trust: That the president for whom so many did not vote, can in turn suspend his political self long enough, and for matters imperative enough, to conduct himself solely for the benefit of the entire Republic.

Our generation's willingness to state "we didn't vote for him, but he's our president, and we hope he does a good job," was tested in the crucible of history, and earlier than most.

And in circumstances more tragic and threatening. And we did that with which history tasked us.

We enveloped our President in 2001. And those who did not believe he should have been elected - indeed those who did not believe he had been elected - willingly lowered their voices and assented to the sacred oath of non-partisanship.

And George W. Bush took our assent, and re-configured it, and honed it, and shaped it to a razor-sharp point and stabbed this nation in the back with it.

Were there any remaining lingering doubt otherwise, or any remaining lingering hope, it ended yesterday when Mr. Bush commuted the prison sentence of one of his own staffers.

Did so even before the appeals process was complete; did so without as much as a courtesy consultation with the Department of Justice; did so despite what James Madison - at the Constitutional Convention - said about impeaching any president who pardoned or sheltered those who had committed crimes "advised by" that president; did so without the slightest concern that even the most detached of citizens must look at the chain of events and wonder: To what degree was Mr. Libby told: break the law however you wish - the President will keep you out of prison?

In that moment, Mr. Bush, you broke that fundamental compact between yourself and the majority of this nation's citizens - the ones who did not cast votes for you. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you ceased to be the President of the United States. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you became merely the President of a rabid and irresponsible corner of the Republican Party. And this is too important a time, Sir, to have a commander-in-chief who puts party over nation.

This has been, of course, the gathering legacy of this Administration. Few of its decisions have escaped the stain of politics. The extraordinary Karl Rove has spoken of "a permanent Republican majority," as if such a thing - or a permanent Democratic majority - is not antithetical to that upon which rests: our country, our history, our revolution, our freedoms.

Yet our Democracy has survived shrewder men than Karl Rove. And it has survived the frequent stain of politics upon the fabric of government. But this administration, with ever-increasing insistence and almost theocratic zealotry, has turned that stain into a massive oil spill.

The protection of the environment is turned over to those of one political party, who will financially benefit from the rape of the environment. The protections of the Constitution are turned over to those of one political party, who believe those protections unnecessary and extravagant and quaint.

The enforcement of the laws is turned over to those of one political party, who will swear beforehand that they will not enforce those laws. The choice between war and peace is turned over to those of one political party, who stand to gain vast wealth by ensuring that there is never peace, but only war.

And now, when just one cooked book gets corrected by an honest auditor, when just one trampling of the inherent and inviolable fairness of government is rejected by an impartial judge, when just one wild-eyed partisan is stopped by the figure of blind justice, this President decides that he, and not the law, must prevail.

I accuse you, Mr. Bush, of lying this country into war.

I accuse you of fabricating in the minds of your own people, a false implied link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.

I accuse you of firing the generals who told you that the plans for Iraq were disastrously insufficient.

I accuse you of causing in Iraq the needless deaths of 3,586 of our brothers and sons, and sisters and daughters, and friends and neighbors.

I accuse you of subverting the Constitution, not in some misguided but sincerely-motivated struggle to combat terrorists, but to stifle dissent.

I accuse you of fomenting fear among your own people, of creating the very terror you claim to have fought.

I accuse you of exploiting that unreasoning fear, the natural fear of your own people who just want to live their lives in peace, as a political tool to slander your critics and libel your opponents.

I accuse you of handing part of this Republic over to a Vice President who is without conscience, and letting him run roughshod over it.

And I accuse you now, Mr. Bush, of giving, through that Vice President, carte blanche to Mr. Libby, to help defame Ambassador Joseph Wilson by any means necessary, to lie to Grand Juries and Special Counsel and before a court, in order to protect the mechanisms and particulars of that defamation, with your guarantee that Libby would never see prison, and, in so doing, as Ambassador Wilson himself phrased it here last night, of becoming an accessory to the obstruction of justice.

When President Nixon ordered the firing of the Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox during the infamous "Saturday Night Massacre" on October 20th, 1973, Cox initially responded tersely, and ominously.

"Whether ours shall be a government of laws and not of men, is now for Congress, and ultimately, the American people."

President Nixon did not understand how he had crystallized the issue of Watergate for the American people.

It had been about the obscure meaning behind an attempt to break in to a rival party's headquarters; and the labyrinthine effort to cover-up that break-in and the related crimes.

And in one night, Nixon transformed it.

Watergate - instantaneously - became a simpler issue: a President overruling the inexorable march of the law of insisting - in a way that resonated viscerally with millions who had not previously understood - that he was the law.

Not the Constitution. Not the Congress. Not the Courts. Just him.

Just - Mr. Bush - as you did, yesterday.

The twists and turns of Plame-Gate, of your precise and intricate lies that sent us into this bottomless pit of Iraq; your lies upon the lies to discredit Joe Wilson; your lies upon the lies upon the lies to throw the sand at the "referee" of Prosecutor Fitzgerald's analogy. These are complex and often painful to follow, and too much, perhaps, for the average citizen.

But when other citizens render a verdict against your man, Mr. Bush - and then you spit in the faces of those jurors and that judge and the judges who were yet to hear the appeal - the average citizen understands that, Sir.

It's the fixed ballgame and the rigged casino and the pre-arranged lottery all rolled into one - and it stinks. And they know it.

Nixon's mistake, the last and most fatal of them, the firing of Archibald Cox, was enough to cost him the presidency. And in the end, even Richard Nixon could say he could not put this nation through an impeachment.

It was far too late for it to matter then, but as the decades unfold, that single final gesture of non-partisanship, of acknowledged responsibility not to self, not to party, not to "base," but to country, echoes loudly into history. Even Richard Nixon knew it was time to resign

Would that you could say that, Mr. Bush. And that you could say it for Mr. Cheney. You both crossed the Rubicon yesterday. Which one of you chose the route, no longer matters. Which is the ventriloquist, and which the dummy, is irrelevant.

But that you have twisted the machinery of government into nothing more than a tawdry machine of politics, is the only fact that remains relevant.

It is nearly July 4th, Mr. Bush, the commemoration of the moment we Americans decided that rather than live under a King who made up the laws, or erased them, or ignored them - or commuted the sentences of those rightly convicted under them - we would force our independence, and regain our sacred freedoms.

We of this time - and our leaders in Congress, of both parties - must now live up to those standards which echo through our history: Pressure, negotiate, impeach - get you, Mr. Bush, and Mr. Cheney, two men who are now perilous to our Democracy, away from its helm.

For you, Mr. Bush, and for Mr. Cheney, there is a lesser task. You need merely achieve a very low threshold indeed. Display just that iota of patriotism which Richard Nixon showed, on August 9th, 1974.

Resign.

And give us someone - anyone - about whom all of us might yet be able to quote John Wayne, and say, "I didn't vote for him, but he's my president, and I hope he does a good job."

[emphasis mine]

Joe Wilson: Bush & Cronies "Corrupt to the Core"

Keith Olbermann speaks to former Amb. Joe Wilson by phone.

Backlash is exploding against Bush's decision to become a part of the obstruction of justice plot for which Scooter Libby was convicted and sentenced. Unofficial online polls at news outlets are running 70-75% AGAINST Bush's decision to "commute" Libby's jail sentence, and everyone from Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald to bloggers to prominent attorneys to Democratic leaders are speaking out strongly against the move. Of course Bush doesn't care. How much lower can his approval rating go? And there's always that intransigent 25% or so of our population that sticks with Bush no matter what he does or how he does it. They're enthusiastic about the commutation in that unreasoning, hypocritical way of theirs.

How would you answer this post on Firedoglake about the strategy of the Dems in the face of the belligerent stonewalling and criminalities of the Bush Administration? Excerpt:

Ask yourself this: suppose the Democrats had announced weeks/months ago that impeachment was “on the table,” that they were deeply concerned about the Administration’s abuse of power, that it was undermining the Constitution and the rule of law across the board. There’s lots more you could add to the list, but you get the idea. Suppose they had said that impeachment wasn’t what they’d planned, and they certainly didn’t need it to retake the White House in 2008, but that they had become so concerned about the Administration’s blatant lawlessness that they wanted to make sure a vehicle was in place before then, if it seemed needed to prevent irretrievable damage.

Suppose they had also said that the Administration’s very acts of stonewalling every investigation being conducted to uncover wrongdoing could be viewed as an abuse of power, a coverup and potential support for an article of impeachment. For example, take the inquiry into whether the Administration had been careless in protecting national security secrets and assets; were they still trying to coverup the lying? Suppose that had been the setting yesterday, just before the President slipped his commutation into the media.

1. Would the President have hestitated in his actions yesterday?

2. Would the President have paid a higher price for his actions? e.g., would the public be more likely to see yesterday’s actions as a confirmation of what the Democrats had been saying? Would that give the Republican’s pause in defending it?

3. Would Democrats be in better shape both politically and legally to respond to the White House tactics regarding subpoenas and other investigative actions?

4. Would the Democrats be in better or worse shape for making the argument that the regime does not deserve to be in office, and that hence, removing them from office was now a more legitimate question?

5. Would the Democrats be in better or worse shape for the 2008 elections?

6. Would the country be in a better position to use its constitutional mechanisms to defend the rule of law, in a way that would strengthen those mechanisms for the future?

That's a yes or better to all six questions, isn't it? As I've said before, someone needs to teach the Dems in Washington how to play poker .... and SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER!

Impeach Gonzales Part 2

A second short video from Brave New Films and Democracy for America. Psst ... do something. If you haven't yet signed the petition, now's the time. Visit ImpeachGonzales.com. Here's a link to an ad (pdf) that Democracy for America is running in select newspapers, including today's edition of The Hill and this week's New York Observer, and ads later this week in the Detroit Metro Times and Los Angeles Daily News. Click to donate to DFA to help them pay for their ad campaign. Pass it on.

The second phase of the Impeach Gonzales Campaign comes at time when the movement against Gonzales is building from the grassroots and as former allies like the League of United Latin American Citizens and La Raza distance themselves from him.

"Americans around the country are standing up to voice opposition to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and his politicization of the Department of Justice," said Democracy for America Chair Jim Dean. "Our message is clear: Impeach Gonzales."

"President Bush will not fire the Attorney General, but the American people can call for his Impeachment," said Filmmaker Robert Greenwald who directed the Impeach Gonzalez video. "The video shows Gonzales has no respect for the truth, for the rules of Congress and for the people of this country. How can he lead our U.S. Justice Department?"

The petition on the website will be sent to all members of the House Judiciary committee, who can begin the impeachment process as outlined in Article II of the U.S. Constitution. This massive impeachment call comes at a time when leaders in both houses are calling for No Confidence Votes against the Attorney General.

Founded by Governor Howard Dean in 2004, Democracy for America is a political action committee dedicated to campaign training, grassroots activism and supporting progressive candidates with a backbone at all levels of government - from the School Board to the Presidency. Robert Greenwald's Brave New Films uses film and viral video to create social change.

Albuquerque A28 Action

From ABQ4IMPEACHMENT: www.ABQ4.com

Saturday, April 28, 2007
Robinson Park, 8th Street & Central, Albq,, 11 AM

Angry Democrats! Disillusioned Republicans! Furious Independents! Show up! Be counted! Protest!  Rally! Show your outrage! IMPEACH GEORGE BUSH! We've got to put pressure on both the Republicans and the Democrats to get this done. If you don't love the Constitution, you do not love your country.  We have an Executive gone amuck! Meet at the Park. March a copy of the Constitution to Heather!

We'll try to spell "IMPEACH" out of real, activist patriots at the park. We'll have some speakers giving reasons for impeachment and which ones to pursue. David Hilliard, co-founder of the Black Panther Party will talk about impeachable offenses. Rick Burnley, peace poet laureate, will give a summation of the slime's crimes in rhyme! We'll enumerate actions you can sign up for or do by yourself, Brave One...
Lastly, we'll march a big copy of the Constitution down to Heather's to leave at her doorstep. After we're there, we can break up and join the Cinco de Mayo celebrations at the Civic Plaza! What a wonderful city!

On April 27th, we will have a sign making party at the Peace and Justice Center at 6:30 PM at 202 Harvard SE.  Bring your own materials, but feel free to use ours, as well!

This is Albuquerque's part of the A28 coalition of national groups dedicated to the impeachment of George Bush and The World Can't Wait, who has been driving this movement from the start.

MAP TO ROBINSON PARK and march path

IKE
Paul Eichhorn
pauleichhorn@1hop2.com
505-270-4414

ABQ4IMPEACHMENT
www.ABQ4.com
The World Can't Wait
www.worldcantwait.org
The April 28 Coalition
www.A28.com

Happy Springtime (Bush Is Over)

Music video presented by JTMP.org and performed by Op-Critical featuring the Harmonic Angels. Please see BushIsOver.org , www.A28.org, and AfterDowningStreet.org to be a part of this rebirth movement.

Iraq Casualty Count: U.S. Troop Deaths 3,333 (85 this month). U.S. Non-Mortal Casualties 26,188. Untold Iraqi Security Force and Civilian Wounded and Dead. War in Iraq Costs: $420,320,000,000 and counting.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich has introduced articles of impeachment against Cheney. Learn more.

A28 impeachment events everywhere on Saturday. Find one near you: http://www.a28.org

Also visit: http://www.impeach07.org

Impeachment Put on Table at Capitol Today
Submitted by davidswanson on Wed, 2007-04-25 23:15.

At noon today a distinguished group of public elected officials, prominent voices of conscience, actors and artists, and military families gathered in front of the U.S. Capitol to call for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

With debate sharpening between Congress and administration over including withdrawal dates from Iraq in the Supplemental Spending Bill, today's press conference continued the growing momentum against the Bush Administration. Dennis Kucinich, having filed an impeachment resolution Tuesday against Vice President Cheney appeared at today's press conference and said that yesterday the press said he was alone in calling for impeachment. Today standing together with the 100 of us gathered in front of the Capitol, he declared that he is not alone, he is standing with the people for impeachment.

Among today's speakers were Mayor Rocky Anderson (Salt Lake City); Pultizer Prize winning journalist Chris Hedges; Daniel Ellsberg; Cindy Sheehan; World Can't Wait Director, Debra Sweet; The Nation correspondent, John Nichols; co-founder of Afterdowningstreet.org, David Swanson; and Washington State legislator, Eric Oemig.

Several speakers brought out the full array of crimes of the Bush Administration. Chris Hedges said: "The President is guilty, in short, of what in legal circles is known as the "crime of aggression." And, if we as citizens do not hold him accountable for these crimes, if we do not begin the process of impeachment, we will be complicit in the codification of a new world order, one that will have terrifying consequences."

A28: Got Colored Cups? Live Near a Highway with a Chain Link Fence?

Santa Barbara City College

You can see more examples at After Downing Street. And you, too, can create an event and/or sign up for one at the April 28 IMPEACH website. Here's one event planned for Albuquerque on April 28:

We’ll use our bodies to spell out “Impeach” on the lawn, take pictures from the hotel next door, have a rally, reviewing impeachable offenses and march a copy of the contstitution to Heather Wilson’s office. David Hilliard, one of the founders of the Black Panther Party will talk about violations of the Constitution. Meet at Robinson Park, 8th Street and Central, 11:00 AM to 12:00 PM.

Looking for volunteers to help me lay out “IMPEACH” on the grass before the rally at 10:00 AM, volunteer to be a peace keeper to help guide the march safely to Heather’s place, to make signs, and to take photos for me to use for flyers for the next event. The goal for our “human mural” on the lawn is 200 people, so please sign up and tell your friends! Contact pauleichhorn@1hop2.com or 505-270-4414. Please sign up to participate here.

A28 describes their nationwide effort as follows:

Anybody can start an A28 action. It can be as small as writing it on the sidewalk in chalk or as large as organizing 2,000 people on a beach to make a human mural. Be creative! Some of the ways that people are talking about spelling it out include: signs, gigantic lasers, toy soldiers, stencils, LED throwies, freewayblogging, banner drops, light projections, t-shirts, rocks, skydivers, skywriters, peaches, christmas lights, flags and balloons. If you're ready to get an action going in your community, please sign up here.

Vermont Senate Votes to Impeach Bush, Cheney

Unlike New Mexico, where nine Democrats joined Republicans on a procedural maneuver to kill a NM Senate Joint Memorial seeking impeachment of Bush and Cheney during this year's Legislative Session, Vermont's Senate today voted 16-9 for a similar measure. As reported this morning by the Associated Press:

MONTPELIER, Vt. - Vermont senators voted Friday to call for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, saying their actions have raised "serious questions of constitutionality."

... The resolution says Bush and Cheney's actions in the U.S. and abroad, including in Iraq, "raise serious questions of constitutionality, statutory legality, and abuse of the public trust."

"I think it's going to have a tremendous political effect, a tremendous political effect on public discourse about what to do about this president," said James Leas, a vocal advocate of withdrawing troops from Iraq and impeaching Bush and Cheney.

... Democratic House Speaker Gaye Symington has kept a similar resolution from reaching the floor in her chamber. She argued that an impeachment resolution would be partisan and divisive and that it would distract Washington from efforts to get the United States out of Iraq, which she says is more important.

... Forty towns voted in favor of similar nonbinding impeachment resolutions at their annual town meetings in March.

To trace what happened with New Mexico's legislative impeachment resolution, check our archive of impeachment posts.

NM Domestic Partnership Act: Wait Till Next Year

Yes, catching up after a vacation is a you-know-what. Sadly, New Mexico's domestic partnership bill died at the Legislative Special Session. Insight New Mexico has the story (and audio clips from Peter Simonson of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico). Equality New Mexico reports that Governor Richardson has promised to put domestic partnership on the call for the thirty-day 2008 NM Legislative Session next January.

This year's Domestic Partnership Act passed the NM House THREE times -- once during its initial trip to the House Floor, once to restore the bill after it was gutted by the Senate, and once during the Special Session. Essenatially, it was stripped of its meaning and killed in the final hours of the regular Session by one vote. This post summarizes what happened. Four Democratic Senators voted with Republicans to kill the bill: Tim Jennings (Roswell), John Arthur Smith (Deming), Lidio Rainaldi (Gallup) and Carlos Cisneros (Questa). Opposition by the first three was anticipated, but Cisneros, for unknown reasons, suddenly switched sides. Sen. Cisneros wins my own personal Democratic Turncoat of the 2007 Legislative Session Award for this vote, as well as the one he cast (with 8 other Dem Senators) to deny the NM impeachment bill a floor debate in the Senate.

Sen. Cisneros has long been a champion of environmental, health care and other liberal causes, so it seems entirely out of character that he voted as he did in these two instances. Who knows what kinds of political pressures convinced him to vote as he did or when they came from. Maybe his thinking was still muddled because of the whack on the head with a hammer he got from his then wife, Patsy, when she caught him at a cabin with another woman in May of 2005. You can't make this stuff up. I just hope he didn't have the nerve to kill the domestic partnership bill on "moral" grounds. Maybe he'll regain his senses by next January.

Should you want to torture yourself, you can refresh yourself on our coverage of the ups and downs of this (and other) legislation by visiting our 2007 Legislative Session post archive. Also see State Senator Dede Feldman's blog post on the wrap-up of the nightmarish Special Session.

Alibi Focuses on NM Impeachment Effort in Latest Edition

The unsuccessful impeachment effort in New Mexico is still making waves and getting media coverage. Why? One reason is that the initiative was ultimately stopped by Democrats. These days, many rank and file Dems feel they have two forces working against them -- right wing Bushies and leaders of their own Party. All too often we're being stonewalled from the right and from within. Too many Dem officeholders, candidates and power brokers still seem paralyzed, afraid to risk the wrath of right wing criticism and smears. Meanwhile, polls consistently show that public opinion is on the side of the Dem activists. Voters want decisive action to stem the damage the Bush administration continues to inflict on both domestic and foreign affairs -- not more excuses on why we can't act now.

The latest edition of the Alibi focuses on the impeachment battle that occurred during New Mexico's regular Legislative Session that ended last Saturday. In the end, nine Democratic Senators joined with Republicans to kill the resolution (SJR 5) before it was allowed the floor debate it had earned by passage through three Senate Committees. In their News/Opinion section, James Scarantino describes the Democratic betrayal, led by Senate President Pro-Tempore Ben Altamirano, in a piece entitled, "Democrats Thumb Their Noses at Democrats." You might say. As to an explanation for the defection of the Dems, Scarantino reports:

I asked Altamirano’s office why he switched from seconding the motion for the impeachment resolution in committee to killing it on the Senate floor. Altamirano has yet to explain himself. Sen. John Arthur Smith reportedly told one activist he opposed the resolution because “you can’t impeach someone for being stupid.” I haven’t seen any explanation from the others.

In their Features section, the Alibi's editor, Christie Chisholm, comments on The Year of Impeachment and presents the views of Sen. Gerald Ortiz y Pino (D-Albuquerque), one of the bill's main sponsors along with Sen. John Grubesic, contrasted by the negative response to the effort by Republican Sen. Rod Adair (