Confessions of Dick Cheney





Dick Cheney Interview ABC News

Cheney Aware of Gitmo Waterboarding

copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert.  BeThink.org

There was a break in the news.  On Cable News Network Wolf Blitzer was noticeably moved.  He excitedly reported; Dick Cheney confessed.  Broadcaster Blitzer’s words were a bit more tempered.  He said, “This just coming into The Situation Room.  The Vice President, Dick Cheney, has given ABC News an interview and confirming now publicly that the Bush administration did engage in the very controversial interrogation tactic of waterboarding.”  The Commentator then asked America to listen to the clip.  ABC News Correspondent Jonathan Karl inquired of the outgoing high-level government official, “Did you authorize the tactics that were used against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?”  Without hesitation, the Vice President responded.  “I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the — the process cleared, as the agency, in effect, came in and wanted to know what they could and couldn’t do.  . . .  (T)hey talked to me, as well as others, to explain what they wanted to do.  And I supported it.  

Viewers vented.  Some shifted nervously in their seats.  However, The Judicial Watch was not amused.  Nor were they elated.  The answer was not the one this Conservative organization, hoped for, groped for, and searched for though the courts, for all these many years.  Vice President Cheney did not confess to sins conceived long before September 11, 2001.  He told said nothing of the maps and charts of Iraqi oil fields.  Foreign suitors for Iraqi oilfield contracts were not discussed as they had been in March 5, 2001, six months and six days before the infamous September 11 attacks.

No, Dick Cheney, spoke of none of what might have interested Judicial Watch.  Perchance, those involved with this institute listened and wondered of the Iraq oil map. would the Vice President confess to knowledge of these?  From appearances, it seemed he would not.

Seeming pleased with his decision and participation, the man second to the Commander-In-Chief avowed, “It’s been a remarkably successful effort and I think the results speak for themselves.”  Indeed, the consequences do speak volumes, as does Dick Cheney’s willingness to disclose what for so long has been an elusive truth.  Yet, a few wondered; was this statement a confession, or merely a confirmation of what had long been known, an acknowledgment of sorts?

As the words tripped off Dick Cheney’s tongue, the public began to talk.  Millions were ecstatic.  He admitted it, they declared.  Throughout cyberspace and in local communities people were all abuzz.  Announcers throughout the airwaves and people on the streets pondered.  “Did he just say that?”  The answer was, of course he did.  Richard Bruce Cheney knew, as he has reason to understand.  He is indeed, above the law.  A myriad of moments affirmed this for him.  Given years of opportunities, the Democrats consistently have chosen not to touch him.

Oh, a few tried.  More might insist that Dick Cheney be removed from office, just as many attested to the need to indict the President.  However, nothing was done.  

Former Senator and nominee for the President, George McGovern could not convince the Democratic leadership.  Florida Congressman Robert Wexler actively campaigned to, at least, begin hearings.  In November 6, 2007 Dennis Kucinich offered a Privileged Resolution in his attempt to avail the Congress of the need to censure Cheney.  However, the Democrats averted the opportunity.

Hence, Dick Cheney trusted he was safe to speak of virtually anything.  Specifically, the Vice President was certain he was safe to discuss his role in ‘purposeful persecution.’  Mister Cheney recalled that the Democrats decreed by their silence that torture was sanctioned.  In reality, Progressives presented the President and his Cabinet with a dictum of faith in the practice.  Those who supposedly sit on the Left side of the aisle signed, sealed, and delivered a permission slip for abusive behaviors on the part of Americans in December 2002, almost six years to the day from what some had hoped was a confession.

The news today that leading Democrats, including Jane Harman and Nancy Pelosi, were informed about the torture of military prisoners and allegedly didn’t just acquiesce but actually approved it is not something that particularly surprises.  The descent into war crimes under this administration provoked very little public Democratic anger or resistance for the years in which it was used most promiscuously.  The presidential campaign of John Kerry offered only token opposition.  The subject never came up in a single presidential debate in 2004.  And the way in which the torture issue has subsequently been raised by Democrats bespeaks opportunism as much as principled outrage and opposition.

What was perhaps more extraordinary and less discussed from the ABC interview was the anomalous question posed to a reflective Vice President Cheney, had he changed.  Earlier in the interview, Dick Cheney had offered that the 9-11 terrorist attacks had definitely became “a prime motivation” for his future decisions.  He said, the events that occurred on that September day in 2001 ‘critically shaped his actions in the years that followed.’  Yet, concurrently, he attested to the fact he had not changed.  

Dick Cheney’s answer was accurate and insincere, all in the same breath.  Judicial Watch, Incorporated, “a Conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, [which] promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government,” might say this man is a marvel, an artist, and an articulate obfuscator.  Judicial Watch should know.  

When the Bush Administration formed the National Energy Policy Development Group and then proceeded to hold meetings in private, Judicial Watch sensed a clear violation of the Freedom of Information Act.  The foundation took legal actions.  “Unfortunately, on May 9, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the Vice President’s Energy Task Force did not have to comply with the Federal Advisory Act.”

Hence, with a history of the Democrats and the Courts on Cheney’s side the man felt no compunction to share what might have caused some havoc, were there any mayhem to be had by opponents of the Administration.  Jonathan Karl, the ABC News Journalist, who some thought captured a confession on tape affirmed and asked for another perchance candid comment,  Mister Karl stated, “You probably saw Karl Rove last week said that if the intelligence had been correct, we probably would not have gone to war.”  He was greeted with what is arguably not a confession; nor is the retort correct, or incorrect.

Cheney: I disagree with that.

This portion of the answer is true.  Dick Cheney did differ with the notion that, were the intelligence correct, the United States would not have gone to war with Iraq.  However, his reason was not as he went on to state.  Stockpiles, an intent on the part of Saddam Hussein to supply terrorist organizations with arms or money did not incite the Vice President or likely the Administration.  Granted, Dick Cheney did and does believe as he shared on air.

This was a bad actor and the country’s better off, the world’s better off, with Saddam gone, and I think we made the right decision, in spite of the fact that the original NIE was off in some of its major judgments.

What the Vice President neglected to say was what the Courts ruled he did not need to reveal.  ““Executive privilege was improperly invoked by Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, and now the Bush administration,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton stated.  No, Dick Cheney did not, would not say that.  A confession of such clarity certainly would not come from this public servant, at least not yet.  That admission would be breaking news.  Cable News Network Wolf Blitzer and every other Broadcaster, were that declaration of guilt to occur, would have a real reason to be excited.  The Judicial Watch Educational Foundation would be elated.  Were that to happen, perchance, the American people would be moved to finally act.  For now, the public acquiesces while they sit and await an authentic confession.

Confessions and Concessions . . .

Wexler Waxes Practical Reasons for Impeachment



American Hero: Rep. Robert Wexler calls for Impeachment hearings

copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert

In an region filled with inert sand, in the Southern most State of Florida, there is an oasis.  This breath of fresh air moves through the trees in Palm Beach County and in the halls of Congress in Washington, District of Columbia.  A man who envisions “a more perfect Union” emanates enthusiasm for the ethical principles that define the democracy he loves.  He stands solid in his belief; a nation founded in freedom for all its people cannot let a corrupt authority take these liberties away.  This spirited being has a name and a title, Congressman Robert Wexler.  

On July 26, 2008, Representative Wexler once again expressed his worry for what has remained “off the table.”  When asked is impeachment too little, too late, he said, “The crimes of this Administration must be revealed and Bush and Cheney must be held accountable.”  The Congressman fears a commitment to the Constitution has waned amongst his fellow legislators, and perhaps within the citizenry.  Hence, Robert Wexler submitted a call to action.  He requests Americans consider the history of censure and what occurs when Executive power is abused.

Many of the people in Wexler’s district exclaim with glee as they observe the vigor of this visionary, as do advocates of impeachment throughout the nation.  However, an equal number within the electorate express dissent to the opinion, prosecution is essential.  Some think we can wait, or as a nation, we have waited too long.  Others say a trial will trivialize lawmakers.  A petty and partisan focus is futile.  Nonetheless, Robert Wexler is not dissuaded.  For him, democracy cannot be forsaken.

The Congressman who identifies himself, as a Fire Breathing Liberal learned to survive and thrive in a Conservative State, as well as in the Halls of Congress.  

Principles Robert Wexler adopted long ago have helped him to succeed.  In his youth, the Congressman realized that many people may prefer to be passive, particularly where censure is considered.

Detractors of an impeachment inquiry by the House judiciary committee into whether President George W. Bush has committed impeachable offenses contend that no questions should be asked until conclusive incriminating evidence is either volunteered up by the suspects themselves or appears before them by spontaneous combustion. In other words, they say, no inquiry should commence until proof of the president’s guilt has been unearthed-proof which would, of course, make the inquiry superfluous!

They may think it easier to speak of little of what concerns them. Congressman Wexler cannot sit quietly when he witnesses what he thinks is injustice. He understands and personifies the democratic adage, “every vote and every voice counts.” Experience has taught Robert Wexler each person matters.  He muses that any of us may not know what will move us; as he inscribed, “The reality is that sometimes issues find” us.  Representative Wexler contends when a problem presents itself, people must address it.

Today, the unavoidable need to impeach the two criminals who currently occupy the White House consumes Representative Robert Wexler, and with good reason.  Thirty-five Articles of Impeachment scream for consideration.

Wexler has heard the call.  He has also listened to those who reject the notion.  They say, “Impeachment proceedings would be a partisan effort.”  It is too late to censure George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.  There is not enough evidence. To prove high crimes and misdemeanors.  Hearings would be a distraction.  Undeterred, Congressman Wexler reminds us.

This is not a partisan issue: Congress is a co-equal branch of government with the Executive, and it cannot allow this attack on our powers to go unanswered. To ignore these actions is tantamount to a willful concession of our rights as legislators. No Democrat, Republican, or Independent should allow Congress’ powers to be so undermined.

Nor should Congress allow the calendar to determine whether we should ignore abuses of office. No President should be given immunity and free-reign just because there are only a few months left in their term.

Impeachment Hearings can be held very quickly – in a manner of weeks.

Although today we don’t have the votes to impeach today – neither did the Judiciary Committee investigating President Nixon until AFTER hearings were held and the truth was revealed. We must put a halt to this historic Administrative power grab.

Congress has not lived up to its promises, and we can no longer credibly claim that impeachment would upset our agenda. Our agenda has not withstood presidential vetoes or senatorial filibusters. If we do nothing, this session will be remembered for our conceding the rightful and constitutional powers of Congress, and little more.

The Congressman from South Florida offers a laudable verity.  Robert Wexler, heeds the caution set forth by Conservative Constitutional Scholar Bruce Fein.  If we do not impeach President George W. Bush and Dick Cheney then we will have allowed for an awful precedence, one that cannot easily be undone.   If we as a nation continue to accept the practices of a President drunk with power, our republic will be perchance permanently crippled.  Despite all the hype and hope that finally, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has taken action, the truth is, an arraignment or even an adequate investigation remains stalled.  Indeed . . .

“This is not an impeachment hearing,” Conyers felt obliged to remind everybody.

“Maybe,” proposed Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), “what we’re here for is something called impeachment lite. . . . We’re sort of in that Never-Neverland of accusing the president of impeachable offenses but not taking actions to impeach him, which I guess impugns him but does not impeach him, but maybe it has the same effect in the court of public opinion.”

There was more truth to that than Democratic leaders could admit in public. . .

“Let’s restrain ourselves, please,” Chairman Conyers counseled.

Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) also played to the gallery with his eye-for-an-eye logic: “If lying about consensual sexual activity fits the bill for impeachment, then certainly lying to the American people about the reason for invading Iraq . . . qualifies as an official — excuse me — as an impeachable offense.” The crowd applauded on cue.

“I am inclined to remind everyone,” Conyers intoned again, “please refrain from any actions of support or opposition.”

Thus, the official word is that we, the American people and our supposed Representatives, must refrain, abstain, desist, and decline to vote or voice our objection to what has occurred in the Oval Office.  Chairman Conyers claims that his colleagues and constituents must forfeit our Constitutional right to censure an Administration that commits countless high crimes and misdemeanors.  Collectively, we need to be calm, while the crooks and liars at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue destroy our democracy.  Perhaps, it is time to again consider why . . .


Wexler Wants Real Impeachment Hearing Now

Submitted by davidswanson on Sat, 2008-07-26 04:59.

Today, in the Judiciary Committee, we held a full day of hearings that focused entirely on the crimes of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, and featured testimony by Rep. Dennis Kucinich regarding his Articles of Impeachment against President Bush.

This is a great start – but I am far from satisfied. Following statements by Chairman John Conyers and the Ranking Republicans, I opened with a forceful call for genuine and immediate Impeachment Hearings for President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

The crimes of this Administration must be revealed and Bush and Cheney must be held accountable. Without Impeachment Hearings, we cannot break through the blatant and unprecedented efforts by President Bush to shut down legitimate oversight by this Congress.

As you know, President Bush has inappropriately and repeatedly invoked Executive Privilege to keep Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, Josh Bolten, and other White House officials from complying with legal, Congressional Subpoenas.

I believe the only appropriate remedy is to hold Impeachment Hearings.

While Inherent Contempt might dislodge some testimony or at least guarantee the appearance of witnesses, the larger concern is the President’s outrageous abuse of Executive Privilege.

We have been down this road before: in 1973, Articles of Impeachment were introduced against President Nixon after he illegally tried to use Executive Privilege to bury evidence of his wrongdoings.

I fully recognize the significance of holding Impeachment Hearings, and I have not come to this position lightly – but when the President of the United States takes actions that amount to high crimes, we are left with no other option than to seek his impeachment and removal from office.

Our government was founded upon a delicate balance of powers – whereby one branch carefully checks the other branches to prevent a dangerous consolidation of power. President Bush’s actions have totally destroyed this careful balance. Without these checks and balances, the President could run roughshod over any law and turn us into a nation…?…where wars can be waged based on lies?…and laws can be rewritten without the input of Congress or the American people.

Congress must end this disturbing pattern of behavior, and in these circumstances, the only option left is impeachment . . .

I am unbowed in my determination for Impeachment Hearings and I know you feel the same way.

Encourage your friends to stay updated and demonstrate their support by signing up at www.wexlerwantshearings.com

Congressman Robert Wexler

Fire breathing or a breath of fresh air.  Representative Wexler asks us to look at our history, and what might prove a perilous future.  He asks Americans to consider the consequences if we do not censure an abusive Administration.  Robert Wexler pleads, Americans take action.  Support those few who wish to restore the Constitution and bring power back to the people.  Perhaps, citizens might wish to peruse the thirty-five Articles of Impeachment, just as this Florida forward-thinker has.  Robert Wexler requests that citizens,  be they :

Democrats, Republicans or Independents, walk forth and breathe deeply. Let us remember why we love a democracy.

Investigation and Impeachment . . .

Fire Breathing Liberal Wexler; The Phoenix Rises



Wexler going back to Colbert, despite previous controversy

copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert

Trend-setter and teacher Congressman Robert Wexler may have mentored many a freshmen class of Representatives.  Well into the future, the newest Congressmen and women will study the mistakes that might define an earlier Wexler performance.  Certainly, Robert Wexler did.  Upon reflection, his trials helped him to acquire great knowledge.  The Democrat from Boca Raton, Florida learned his lessons well.  He illustrates why, as retired Major League Pitcher Vernon Law attests, “Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, the lesson afterward.”

In 2006, Comedian, Stephen Colbert delivered a pitch.  Robert Wexler, swung and missed, although, then he felt as though the effort was a glorious home run.  It was after the replay, in front of a less than receptive audience that Robert Wexler realized his standing ovation would be rescinded.

Wexler got into trouble for following the host’s instructions to repeat statements that could doom the politician’s reelection if his 2006 race were contested. Those statements included “I enjoy cocaine because it’s a fun thing to do.” At Colbert’s urging, he said he enjoys prostitutes “because it’s a fun thing to do – much like cocaine.”

“If you combine the two together, it’s probably even more fun,” he said.

The day after the show, stories hit the mainstream media – including The Associated Press and NBC’s “Today Show” – characterizing Wexler’s appearance as a genuine admission of the use of cocaine and prostitution. On the following night’s show, Colbert took the unprecedented move of refuting the news accounts and defending the congressman.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), then the minority leader, issued a verbal warning discouraging other lawmakers from going on Colbert’s show. Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) made a similar statement as Democratic Caucus chairman to freshman Democrats at the beginning of the 110th Congress.

Undeterred and proud that he is open to erudition, Robert Wexler decided he would place himself in a precarious position once again.  Congressman Wexler said of his initial effort, “he harbors no hard feelings.”  Indeed, the  incredible Representative said “he knew what he was getting into before he sat down for the interview.”  

The wise and wondrous, Congressman Wexler extolled praise upon those some see as his nemesis’. Colbert’s and Jon Stewart’s “The Daily Show” provides “a method of political communication that is very powerful and going to be more powerful.”

With that in mind, Robert Wexler again chose to take the stage.  He spoke with Stephen Colbert on Thursday, June 26, 2008.  The determined and courageous Representative studied his earlier examination.  Mister Wexler evaluated the “tests” others took under the tutelage of Mister Colbert. Then, he concluded, he could again enter the fray and rise above it.  After all, he is a fire-breathing Liberal who not only survives, he thrives . . . just as he did in this recent command performance.  Well done Congressman Wexler!

Robert Wexler Resources . . .

Impeachment, “Off the Table” and On the House Floor



Kucinich Impeachment Articles mention RAW STORY

copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may say impeachment is off the table; nonetheless, on June 9, 2008, Congressman Dennis Kucinich placed it on the floor.  For five hours, the Ohio Representative stood before his colleagues and an expectant  national audience.  Kucinich spoke of what has remained unmentionable for far too long.  The President of the United States of America has committed high crimes and misdemeanors.  

The contents of thirty-five articles affirmed President George W. Bush deceived the nation.  Congressman Kucinich contends, the President violated his oath of office.  The Commander-In-Chief led our country into the Iraq war under false pretenses.  

On hundreds of occasions, George W. Bush made use of signing statements.  These declarations allowed the Administration to disobey laws.  With the stroke of a pen, the President proclaimed a ban on torture was extraneous to his reality.  Mister Bush decided to shun provisions he endorsed and proposed when he explained the need for a Patriot Act.  The list of laws George W. Bush disregarded is extensive.

A year ago, the Ohio Congressman and former Presidential hopeful, introduced a resolution to censure Vice President Dick Cheney.  Dennis Kucinich understood that this Vice President exerted more power than any other person who previously held his position.  Indeed some argue, Dick Cheney is more if not equally culpable for crimes enacted by the Executive Branch.  The resolution censure Cheney was referred to the House Judiciary Committee.  Thus far, no action has been taken on the motion.  

However, members of the Committee have verbalized their support.  Florida Representative Robert Wexler, Congressman Luis Gutierrez from Illinois, and Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin vehemently called for hearings.  The three believe as does Dennis Kucinich does, grounds for an arraignment are sufficient.  For these outspoken Representatives, Vice President, Richard Cheney, along with the President, George W. Bush violated the War Crimes Act of 1996.  They ignored the anti-torture Act.  Bush and Cheney authorized the abuse of detainees, who have been illegally held at the Guantanamo Bay Prison Camp.

The President and Vice President repeatedly sullied the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.  This law requires court approval for presidential wiretaps.  None were obtained before millions of Americans telephones were bugged.  The President defiantly dismisses any public concern.  He has no problem with deferring the public’s right to privacy.

Early in their joint terms, George Bush and Dick Cheney warned, there was an eminent threat of a nuclear attack.  They said the United States was in danger of inhalation.  Desirous of oil in the Middle East, Texas tea tycoons alleged Saddam Hussein purchased uranium in Niger.  Evidence furnished by envoy, Joseph Wilson validated this was not true.  Nonetheless, the Chief Executive and his chum declared the leader of Iraq wanted aluminum tubes for uranium enrichment.  George W. Bush and Richard Cheney understood the claims were fallacious.  The two Executives would take care of any attempt to present accurate information to the people.  The Administration would destroy the messenger.

Mister Bush and Mister Cheney were aware that others within their Administration questioned the validity of Intelligence Reports, which stated a need for concern in reference to Iraq.  At least one, former Secretary of State Colin Powell tried to convince the President and his Vice an attack on Iraq was unadvisable.  Not to be dissuaded, the two “leaders’ withheld facts form the public.  The Administration purposely warped the data in an attempt to usurp Congress’ Constitutional powers to declare war.

Yet, regardless of the volumes of reports released over the course of many years, Congressman Kucinich and those on the Judiciary Committee who support censure, have much opposition.

Former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman, who served on the House Judiciary Committee during the impeachment of Richard Nixon, does not disagree with the Representatives who endorse impeachment of the current Administration.  Conservative Constitutional Scholar Bruce Fein, a Republican who served in the Reagan Justice Department does not quarrel with the need to commence hearings.  Former Senator and Democratic presidential nominee, George McGovern published an op-ed, demanding impeachment proceedings for both Bush and Cheney.  None of these esteemed individuals question the motivation or the measure.

The only deterrent to the necessary action is found on Capitol Hill.  Politically savvy officials in the nation’s Capitol choose to set a precedent that historians’ caution is unwise.  Elizabeth Holtzman states.

Whether or not they bring electoral rewards in 2008, impeachment proceedings are the right thing to do.  They will help curb the serious abuses of this administration, and send a strong message to future administrations that no president or vice president is above the law.

Sadly, her words will not be heard on heeded.  Too many Democrats and Republicans have become deaf and dumb to the proper rule of law.  For too long, average Americans and elected officials trusted the Chief Executive.  They allowed themselves to be persuaded by a unscrupulous President and his Vice.  

The people may no longer have faith.  Perhaps, the public is just too embarrassed to face the fire.  The adage heard in the halls of Congress and on the streets of many a city is, “We hired them.  If we dismiss the two, what might that say of our judgment.”  Hence, Americans lay bare the lie, we have learned nothing from history.

A vote on the Resolution is expected on June 11, 2008.  Those in support of impeachment can only hope our Representatives will act more responsibly than we, the American people, or our Administration has.

References for what might never be officially realized . . .

 

Video: Wexler Confronts Condi on Iraq War Lies; Calls for Contempt Vote

By Wexler For Congress Campaign.  Contact the Congressman at contact@wexlerforcongress.com

Cross posted with Permission from Congressman Wexler.

Originally posted on Wednesday February 13, 2008 at 05:11:16 PM EST



Wexler Confronts Condi on Iraq War Lies

Today, in hearings on Capitol Hill, I confronted Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on her role in the lies, exaggerations, and misdirection that led us into the Iraq war.

During my questioning, Secretary Rice falsely stated that she never saw intelligence casting doubt on the Bush Administration claims that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction.  This unbelievable statement is flatly contradicted by numerous government reports and CIA testimonials.

Sources such as the 2006 Senate Intelligence Report, a January 2004 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace report as well as former CIA agents (including Tyler Drumheller) have disclosed that there was contrary intelligence to the information provided to the Bush Administration in the lead up to the Iraq war.

Please view the video above.

Secretary Rice’s responses demonstrate once and for all that we need aggressive oversight over this out of control Administration.  Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has ignored the constitutional right of Congress to provide such oversight.

It is time Congress took aggressive action to assert our rights on behalf of the American people.

The House of Representatives must immediately hold former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in contempt of Congress for their failure to respond to congressional subpoenas.  

I have been aggressively lobbying Members of Congress to support a vote on contempt, and I am thrilled to report that Speaker Pelosi told me directly that she agrees it is well past time to vote on contempt.  I am anticipating that the House will shortly vote on resolutions of both civil and criminal contempt for both Miers and Bolten.

No one should be immune from accountability and the rule of law.

Not Harriet Miers or Josh Bolten.

And especially not Condoleezza Rice, George W. Bush or Dick Cheney.

It is time to defend the Constitution and our rights as a co-equal branch of government.  

I will continue to take on the Bush Administration for their outrageous abuses just as I confronted Condoleezza Rice today and Attorney General Mukasey last week.  (Click here to see my questioning of Mukasey.)

With your help, we will hold these top Bush officials in contempt and continue our efforts to hold impeachment hearings for Vice President Dick Cheney.

Thank you, as always, for your great support.

Yours truly,

Congressman Robert Wexler

Wexler, Gutierrez, Baldwin, Kucinich, and the People Call For Cheney Censure



Rep. Wexler Wants Cheney Impeachment Hearings

copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert

May I offer my sincerest gratitude to Representatives, Robert Wexler, Luis Gutierrez, and Tammy Baldwin.  These glorious members of the House Judiciary Committee, recently raised the volume on the issue of impeachment for Vice President Cheney.  The three invite us, the average citizen, to join them.  Please express your distress; sign the petition.  Call for Hearings. Without you the Vice President will continue to avoid an official and necessary censure.

Please sign the petition. Join Congressman Wexler’s Call For Cheney impeachment Hearings.

Please do not stop there.  Americans have seen what occurs when we are complacent.  For too long Congressman Dennis Kucinich spoke of what many thought obvious, and only a few listened.  

Throughout his term, Vice President, Richard B. Cheney acted on questionable  information.  He made decisions that many considered problematic.  Cheney “may” have committed numerous “high crimes and misdemeanors.”  However, no matter how many millions of Americans joined in the call to censure, the cry was hushed.  The mainstream media barely and rarely spoke of the measure.  Only a scant number of Representatives endorsed House Resolution 333, submitted by the Representative from Ohio.

As House leaders sat silent, Vice President Cheney continued to violate the doctrine known as the United States Constitution.  He did so without charge or challenge.  

For years, Richard B. Cheney declared the Executive Branch has “supreme” power.  Many scoffed; however, Congress initiated no formal action.  The Vice President did not stop doing as he pleased.  Complaints from the House and the Senate mounted; yet, Cheney remained safe from censure.

It seemed the Vice President’s skin, and his contempt for law, were impenetrable.  Richard B. Cheney refused and rebuffs accountability.

The Vice President prefers aggression and plans attacks against other Nation States.  Until now Congress, and the American people stood by.  Finally, the tide may have turned.  

Each day, Americans and Legislators discover much occurred within the White House walls over the last seven years.  We are increasingly certain the Vice President acted with dubious authority.  The more we learn, the more we realize a need to impeach Richard B. Cheney.  Representatives and House Judiciary Committee Members Robert Wexler, Luis Gutierrez, Tammy Baldwin, and the cyberspace community have stated their extreme concern.  However, just as Presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich realized during his campaign to hold Cheney accountable, the media would rather not address this state of affairs.

If we the people are to be served, if we are to honor the rights afforded us by the United States Constitution, we must do more than wait for Congress to act.  Our signature on a petition will not be enough to convince a reluctant House Speaker that it is time to embrace this cause.  I invite you to submit a Letter to the Editor of any and every newspaper.  For Representative Wexler alone, although he tried, cannot create the news storm necessary for impeachment.

I offer my own submission for your review.  Please request coverage.  Ask Journalist nationwide to report on more than this Administration wants us to hear.  I thank you for all that you are and all that you do.

If you wish to use my letter, without the links and signature, I offer a Portable Document Format [pdf] version.

  • Letter to the Editor, Call to Cover Cheney Impeachment Hearings.

  • Dearest Editorial Staff . . .

    I am aware of a troublesome campaign to ignore the call to impeach Vice President Dick Cheney.  I write to express my distress and to request coverage.

    On Florida Progressive Radio, Representative Robert Wexler spoke of what he and his colleagues experienced when they submitted an Op-Ed essay on the topic.  The major print media outlets did not publish this important treatise on impeachment.  The message was not muffled; it was ostensibly silenced.

    The mainstream media acted as though an investigation into the practices within the Oval Office, or the Office of the Vice President, were permanently “off the table.”  No matter the outcry from the masses, the media continues to dismiss the call.  

    Auspiciously, after the news organizations cast the cry for censure aside, Representative Wexler turned to the public.  The cyberspace community connected to the memorandum the Congressman and his colleagues wrote.  Those that surf the Web not only endorsed the crucial communication, Internet users garnered greater support for the proposition.  An ambitious online effort heralded the need for immediate impeachment hearings.  Within a short time, more than a hundred thousand signers stated they were in favor of a move to censure Vice President Dick Cheney.  

    Constitutional scholars have warned us.  The precedent we set when we overlook what an arrogant Administration does will forever damage our nation.  If Americans do not uphold democratic principles, we weaken our Constitution.

    For too long, Presidential aspirant Dennis Kucinich has been a lone Congressional voice.  On more than one occasion, Kucinich spoke of the need to censure Vice President Cheney.  In November 2007, Representative Kucinich presented a Privileged Motion on the floor of the House.  Even that bold overture received little press.  

    Nonetheless, some of his fellow Representatives considered the possibility.  With the introduction of new evidence, three prominent Representatives felt as though they too had reason to move forward with an investigation and hearings.  

    Representatives Robert Wexler (D-FL), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), all Members of the House Judiciary Committee, considered the novel revelation offered by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan.  The Vice President and his staff purposefully gave then Press Secretary McClellan false information about the outing of Valerie Plame Wilson, a covert Central Intelligence agent.  Dick Cheney and his team intentionally chose to release erroneous reports to the American people.  This realization prompted the newly stated and amplified concern for impeachment.  

    Only after much protest from readers did the Miami Herald print an edited version of the original letter from the Representatives.  However, it seems that Florida publication and all other periodicals are happy to leave the issue behind.  We, the people are not willing to remain silent.

    The need to impeach is imperative.  I implore you.  I invite your newspaper to truly inform Americans.  Rather than encourage apathy, please tell the people, print, more than the White House wants us to know.

    Sincerely . . .

    Betsy L. Angert

    Florida

    Dear friends, family, and familiars; I thank you all for your interest and participation in the process.  On behalf of Congressman Dennis Kucinich, Representatives, Robert Wexler, Luis Gutierrez, Tammy Baldwin, our country, and the Constitution may I extend my deepest appreciation for your thoughts, words, and deeds.  We can only hope that United, America will peacefully stand strong again.  We cannot know unless and until we begin to censure those that fight against us.  We are one, or were, the United States of America, a democratic nation, of, by, and for the people.  Together we can take our country back.

    References and Resources in Support of Impeachment Hearings . . .