Tue
Apr 24 2007
09:55 pm

Dennis Kucinich introduced articles of impeachment against Dick Cheney today:

"Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States."

Kucinich charges Cheney with manipulating intelligence and exaggerating (if not completely fabricating) the threat of an Iraqi WMD attack. He also charges that Cheney exaggerated links between Iraq and al Qaeda and says Cheney's recent threats against Iran exceed his authority and violates the United Nations Charter.

I believe there are several crimes covered by those charges, particularly if the role of the Office of Special Plans in drafting the 2002 NIE Kucinich says was manipulated is explored during testimony.

There are several other offenses Congress should be investigating, but most relate to Rumsfeld more than Cheney, at least given what we know so far, so I'm satisfied with Kucinich's effort.

Here are some questions for Dick under oath:

"How much time did you spend with Chalabi in the year preceeding the invasion of Iraq?"

"Who told Chalabi we had broken Iran's encryption?"

"When did you first meet Ahmed Chalabi?"

"Who thought of the name 'Office of Special Plans'?"

"Who thought of the office?"

"Did White House Counsel issue any rulings regarding creation of that office?"

"Did you or your office edit or alter the 2002 NIE before Congress or the President saw it?"

talidapali's picture

I might just have to...

send Kucinich some money for his campaign.

In fact, that's what I have been telling the DNC and the campaigns that are calling me for donations and such up til now.

"As soon as you start impeachment proceedings against the entire Bush administration from the top on down, THEN I'll talk about giving you some money for your campaigns. Then it will be time to put my money where your mouths are, but not if you're still kissing Republican butt."

_________________________________________________________

"You can't fix stupid..." ~ Ron White"

"I never said I wasn't a brat..." ~ Talidapali

Sven's picture

I believe there are several

I believe there are several crimes covered by those charges

I don't believe that's the best way to think about it, particularly in light of your comment about prosecuting "prosecute policy decisions, not crimes" in the other thread.

A "high crime" is not a criminal offense in the conventional sense; it's an egregious transgression against the state. What constitutes egregious - and for that matter, transgression - was left purposefully vague in the Constitution. In the end, it's a political decision; it's whatever "we" say it is at any given time. It's generally accepted, however, that "maladministration" (i.e., policy choices) is not a high crime.

The charges aren't the Iraq stuff - that's the evidence. The crimes alleged are in that first paragraph you cite: subversion of constitutional government, manifest injury to the people and so on (very similar to the charges leveled against Nixon, actually).

Kucinich could have picked from a wide range of evidence, from alleged violations of statutory law to incidences of executive overreach. Such evidence doesn't have to point to illegality per se; it just has to convince a supermajority that the allegations of high crimes are well founded.

Kucinich probably considers the Iraq intelligence matters the most important and most convincing evidence. I think that's debatable - Cheney & Co.'s unitary executive bullshit on torture and surveillance is in clear contravention of both the will of Congress and the Constitution (Iraq is too, but the intent is more murky).

I think his decision to restrict it to Iraq was also in answer to the oft cited complaint that an impeachment would take longer than Bush's remaining term. Obviously, the problem is that narrow net isn't going to catch enough of his fellow reps.

Scott Emge's picture

Dennis Kucinich introduced articles of impeachment

It's about time somebody did.

Mark Shetterly's picture

Here we go

The impeachment is nothing but an attention getter for Kucinich and another attempt to grab power from the executive branch. If we're going to talk about prosecution, why isn't Harry Reid being charged with sedition and treason and Nancy Pelosi with violation of the Logan Act? Those are both clearly warranted. This is such a crock, I knew that when the Dems got control of congress all that BS they spewed about working for the people to get things done and not getting bogged down in a bunch of partisan retribution was garbage.

Rachel's picture

Let's see: war, scandal and

Let's see: war, scandal and lies, no impeachment. Hummer from a consenting adult, impeachment.

But Metulj, it wasn't the sex, it was the lying.

Oh wait...

rikki's picture

clean up, aisle two

Those are both clearly warranted.

Get in line, bitch. Cheney has been abusing our government, our country and our treasury since 2001. He gets prosecuted first.

What Reid and Pelosi are doing is completely irrelevant to this thread. There is no tit-for-tat when it comes to treason and high crimes against our country. Speak to the charges against Cheney or shut the fuck up.

Factchecker's picture

If we're going to talk about

If we're going to talk about prosecution, why isn't Harry Reid being charged with sedition and treason and Nancy Pelosi with violation of the Logan Act? Those are both clearly warranted.

Given your admission of doing large amounts of coke (see Lucinda thread), why haven't you been charged with felony drug possession? It is clearly warranted.

Or maybe it's just Walker back.

Andy Axel's picture

ZOMG! YOU LIBZ ARE

ZOMG! YOU LIBZ ARE EMBLDENINHG TEH ALL QAIDAH!!!!!

The discourse is pwn3d by juggaloz. I knew it.

____________________________

Georgia's in Florida, dumbass!

Sven's picture

why isn't Harry Reid being

why isn't Harry Reid being charged with sedition and treason and Nancy Pelosi with violation of the Logan Act?

Them's the breaks when you install an imbecile as head of the Justice Dept.

Andy Axel's picture

More from the "Do-Nothing"

More from the "Do-Nothing" caucus:

WASHINGTON - In rapid succession, congressional committees Wednesday ramped up their investigations of the Bush administration by approving a subpoena for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and granting immunity to a former key aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

In Bizarroworld, Tom Delay is still in office and Jack Abramoff gets the Medal of Freedom.

(...waiting for the plea that those upright, ethical GOP congressmen would have gone into an orgy of self-policing had they maintained The Precious in 2006...)

____________________________

Georgia's in Florida, dumbass!

R. Neal's picture

Didja see where Tom Delay

Didja see where Tom Delay accused Reid and Pelosi of treason?

(link...)

Andy Axel's picture

Nice.

That's a chip shot for Delay. 3-stroke par. I expect nothing less from him.

I was coming back here to share this interesting tidbit re: l'affaire Gonzo -- Greg Palast via Digby:

We’ve been here before. Gonzales is getting Libby’d. Takes the bullet for Karl Rove and the White House. If you wondered why the Republican jackals like the sinister Senator Specter piled on Gonzales — it’s because they were told to.

These guys learned from Richard Nixon. In 1973, when Nixon was getting hammered over Watergate, he threw the Senate Committee his Attorney General, a schmuck named Richard Kleindienst. Famously, Nixon’s own Rove, a devious creep named John Erlichman, told Nixon to leave the Attorney General, “twisting slowly in the wind.”

Now. Kucinich's gambit is interesting, given that as a backdrop.

____________________________

Georgia's in Florida, dumbass!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

State News

Local .GOV

Wire Reports

Lost Medicaid Funding

To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

Search and Archives